A Singapore without LKY

When Chok Tong became the PM, LKY took a step back. This was the first phase of preparing Singapore to continue without a LKY. It was the beginning of a transition. LKY was like the dowagers behind the veil, there in the background to keep things in check. When Hsien Loong took over the rein from Chok Tong, it was expected that the transition to a Singapore would move one step ahead and be complete, and LKY would fade away from the political scene. He had achieved what he wanted for Singapore and what he wanted for himself as a father. He could spend his time telling stories to his grandchildren. The transition of Singapore to the next phase, to run efficiently and effectively in the absence of LKY, is vital to give the impression that Singapore can continue on its own under a new leadership. And even without LKY, it will not run to a halt, there will be no leadership crisis and no drastic changes in policies and direction. The ethos and ways of doing businesses, running the country, will be as predictable as before. In other words, have faith and confidence that things will be normal. The last couple of years have seen LKY not only in front of the veil, but walking beside Hsien Loong in the running of state affairs. In some instances he was walking ahead. The direct participation of LKY in state affairs can be seen in different ways. From the positive angle, we have the strongest team ever, the Dream Team, running the country. We have two Dep PMs, a PM, an Immediate Past PM and LKY himself. It is a formidable team. The strongest team that Singapore ever had. What is a bit troubling is that the transition of a Singapore to a post LKY era is back at square one. It is still the LKY era with LKY fully in charge. It may be a perception, a wrong perception, but still a perception. For those doomsayers, there will be a new song to be sung. Or old song actually. What would Singapore be like without LKY? Will it sink, will there be a leadership crisis, will the new team be able to manage without him? Will there be fear, a loss of confidence and a flight of capital and investment? We have unwittingly taken a big step back in our process of having a Singapore running confidently and proving to the world that with or without LKY nothing changes. Is this good or bad?

Give now talk later

In this extraordinary time while many people are still gasping for breath chasing at runaway prices of basic necessities, PN Balji suggested that the govt should consider a new approach, a give-now-talk-later way. During Hsien Loong's ND Rally speech there were a lot of giveaways, but all came with a series of conditions. These may not be good enough when some people need an immediate jab of morphine to be revived. This formula of giving with conditions, a proven formula to underline the need for self reliance, that nothing comes freely, has worked for some times but needs to be tweaked. It will also show a little more caring and compassion and less calculative. This is only one aspect to look at the govt. But how could this give-now-talk-later style match up with mean testing? The principle of mean testing is to take as much as you can. Check and see how much he has left for you to take. It also goes against the principle of thrift. When inflation is eroding the value of money so rapidly, when things are getting more expensive by the days, everyone is fearing that his/her little savings may not be enough. But the principle of mean testing wants people to spend and eat sharksfin if they have a few dollars more is really bad. What the govt needs to do is provide the medical services that the people want and willing to pay for. Not the type of services that people want but cannot afford to pay or services that people do not want but must want and pay. Somehow it is like take-now-talk-later instead of give-now-talk-later.

Age is Anwar's best defence

At 60 or 61, Anwar can easily walk into a clinic and ask the doctor to certify that he is suffering from ED, Erectile Dysfunction. Period. No more case. Just a little embarrassing on his manhood but solve all his problem. Someone can whisper this to his advisors : )

A place for our own children...in our heart.

Why would parents care for their own children, love them so dearly even though some may be less than normal, even unbearably handicap? This is the unexplained greatness of parental love. My child, and I love my child regardless of anything. Some spent a fortune, gave up jobs, sold all their belongings, just to look after the child, against all odds. There is no such thing as giving up on the child once brought into this world. They would not trade anything for the child, even if someone would to offer them a beautiful child in exchange. Parents will not abandon their own children. My child is everything. There is an emotional thing involved. Reflect on this and the concept of foreign talent. Why are we indulging and dotting on foreign talents and neglect our own children just because they are less talented? Why are we splashing valuable resources on foreign talents, not our children, and not using the same resources on our not too gifted children? Have we gone crazy? If foreign talents are so important, and no talents or lesser talents, even if they are our very own, are less regarded, would we one day exchange all our children for talented foreign talents? Would we forsake and trade our children for other people's children? Our parents will not. We, if we become parents, will not. We wish the talented children of other parents well. But foremost, we will care for our own children first, with everything we got. Don't get carried away with foreign talents. If this necessity is the way to go, culled our own less able children and replaced them with talented foreigners. To live with this logic of pragmatism and survival of the country, we cannot afford to have laggards even if they are our children. It is survival of the fittest. No feelings, no emotions, no attachment, no self. Just simple economics of survival. Take in only the best. Is this the way to go? Why do we called ourselves Singaporeans and this island our home?

Some still disagree with Hsien Loong's liberalisation

The ink is still wet, or the sound of clapping is still reverberating in the ears, and we are hearing the old message again. Hsien Loong has given the go ahead for netizens to blog about politics, even race and religion as long as they are treated respectfully. Now Baey Yam Keng is saying that bloggers reporting on govt issues should be regulated like traditional media. Did he attend Hsien Loong's rally? What is more ludicrous is that he waved the flag of objectivity and responsible reporting as the outstanding trademarks of traditional media when traditional media was not only bashed in cyberspace for its stupidity and highly biased reporting recently. What kind of objectivity are we talking about? And responsible to who? He added that the regulating of bloggers could happen in the future, but not now as the govt would not be comfortable. Is this the confidential thinking of the govt and regulation is only a matter of timing? Maybe it is only a personal view. Lam Pin Min 'was "not aversed" to credible bloggers covering press conferences to engage them in feedback.'

Notable quote by Philip Yeo

'Make sure that our young people are hungry. If our young people are not hungry enough, bring in hungrier ones from overseas. Make them feel hungry, increase the hunger index.' Philip Yeo This may be a magic formula to keep our young competitive and not becoming complacent. Get hungry people who are willing to do more for less, who wanted to do more just to make their lives a little better, bring them here. One very difficult task, and very formidable task, is to make people who are very full to feel hungry. One contradiction is that while everyone knows and can see that these very full people are very full of everything, they sincerely believe that they are very hungry and wanted to have more, but not to do more. This is the biggest challenge facing paradise. The money not enough is not a problem of the poor. It is the problem of the rich. Everyday they kpkb, money not enough.

Black cats and white cats

This is the famous quotation from Deng Xiao Ping. A cat that catches mice, black or white, is still a good cat. While we are in the mood for liberalisation, while we embrace all things, white, black and grey, there are certain basic values, moral values that we should not forget or lose them. Black cat or white cat, black talent or white talent, as long as they can produce are good cats or good talents. But talents who are cheats is not an issue of black or white cats. Cheats are cheats. It is criminal to praise cheats as talents and let the society think that cheats are ok as long as they are talented. This message must not go down to the people and everyone thinks that after cheating, pay a price, one can still be glorified, and walk tall. When out elite promote such a perception, our moral standing is in question. Yellow ribbon is good. The wrong doers must be given a second chance. But to praise wrong doers like role models or idols, that is not very right.

The Hsien Loong shocker

Did anyone of you hear what Hsien Loong said in his National Day Rally last night? It was a shocker alright. More space for political participation. Outdoor demonstration allowed at Hong Lim. Liberalisation of the internet for political campaigns and factual movie scripts. This is a big move definitely. The devil is in the implementation of this change. Would it be just a motherhood statement or is it real? It must be as this is broadcast over the TV and in the papers as well. I was getting worried a few weeks back when Chua Lee Hoong was trumpeting that our authoritarian system is the alternative model to the liberal western model. I thought we are heading that way. And when Ho Peng Kee still insisted that anyone who wanted to participate in political discourse must get into the political arena, things looked grim. Would Ho Peng Kee and his men go around cyberspace asking bloggers if they are poets, philosophers or public intellectuals, or else join a political party? Did Ho Peng Kee got Hsien Loong's message? Or would people and kids be rounded up for putting up white elephants or selling white elephant T shirts? The reality and perception must be in sync, and the reality speaks louder if it is different from the perception or publicly announced govt policies. If things are what Hsien Loong had said, we are marching into a new revolution, a New Age of Internet. And every blogger is a pioneer and active participant in this revolution. And we should be proud of ourselves to be in this movement. Over the last couple of years the govt must be monitoring very closely the happenings in cyberspace. And they must find some comfort that cyberspace could self regulate, and there are decent and passionate bloggers who are airing their views, disagreeing with policies, but all for the betterment of the country and people. Cyberspace is not just rubbish and rogues and scoundrels who abuse their freedom of expression to attack people recklessly. Mysingaporenews and redbeanforum have played a small and significant part in proving that discussion of political and national issues can be conducted rationally and sensibly. We have been in existence for quite sometime and no one has come knocking at our doors in the middle of the night. We should continue to say our piece in the way we are doing, kpkb if necessary, to get our views heard. 90,000 hits a month, that can translate into a substantial number of people reading our news. And they will pass it to their friends and their friends to their friends. It is a communicating process that cannot be under estimated. Keep posting fellow bloggers. Hsien Loong has given the green light. And if Ho Peng Kee ask if you are a poet, philosopher or public intellectual, tell him to see Hsien Loong for the answer.

Where is robertteh?

He is the most prolific forumer in YPAP forum. For several weeks, he has disappeared totally, just like Matilah Singapura in mysingaporenews. What happens, what can happen to him to keep him away from posting? Matilah may have been finished off in Soi Cowboy in Bangkok, or kidnapped by his lovely companions. Both can be a possibility in such popular tourist hangouts. As for robertteh, the only possibility is that he is sick, so sick that he could not post any more. Cyberspace has lost two veterans. Good grief!

Don't get carried away.

'We want to (continue) developing talent, be it local or foreign. One way is to get kids started playing at the kindergartens.' Lee Bee Wah So we got our silver medal. We had our fun and the opportunity to cheer and clap and shout. Now the hilarious moment is over, we should take stock and ask ourselves, 'Is it worth it?' To be able to answer this question, we need to know how much public money is being spent for that medal? This is not like keeping up with the Joneses next door. To do that you are spending your own money. But we are talking about spending millions of public money in the quest for an illusion. Fun to have. But always remember the price and how the money could be channelled for more meaningful things. When we are prepare to mean test our people for hospital admission and not prepared to provide more C class beds, should we be spending so much money to nurture foreign talents to win medals? Spending on our own sons and daughters is an acceptable thing. Spending a small sum of money for a little fun is also acceptable. Just don't get carried away.

The dangers of insensitivity

This is the title of an article by Julie Chia on the Chinatown complex. She was talking about implementing safety measures without sensitivity and this may affect the disabled being help. I would like to borrow her title to talk about the mean thing. Mean testing is being introduced after all. No matter how well meaning, subjecting a fellow citizen to mean testing is cruel, disgraceful and insensitive. Why would a govt think that it is so necessary, that there is no better way out and will implement mean testing on its people? Is this the best solution from our supertalents? If this is, then we need to double the pay and look for better talents. The principle that I am against is that the strong, rich and powerful think that it is ok, acceptable, reasonable, to subject the poor and less able to a demeaning test of his personal wealth, his confidentiality and little self worth. All these are put onto the table to be viewed and study by people with their nose in the air. Huh, this is what this bugger is and has! So pathetic. What a loser! Historically, the rich, the powerful, and the rulers, will gradually degenerate to a state when they no longer empathise with the less fortunate. To them, they are above all these and not affected by it. The poor bugger has no sense of pride or shame, no dignity. And it is ok to line them up and strip them of everything for all to see. Anyone who thinks that mean testing is acceptable and well meaning should not spout the word compassion any more. Let the word compassion be thrown into the dustbin. There must be better ways than mean testing. When the rulers think that mean testing is not mean, we are going down. We have taken the first step down this road. More things will be found befitting for mean testing. It has been suggested that buying HDB flats should be considered for mean testing. What else? Anything that has an element of subsidy should qualify for mean testing. School fees should be the next candidate.

Notable quote by Ho Peng Kee

'Citizens wishing to participate in the public discourse are free to enter politics and fight for their convictions, or to stay outside the ring as 'poets, philosophers and public intellectuals'. Ho Peng Kee I can call myself a poet, but I can't write poems. Can I call myself a philosopher? Hmmm, better don't delude myself. How about public intellectuals instead of private intellectuals? What's the dif? Who dares to call himself an intellectual? I will be content with the 4th P, just simply 'people.' Can the people of a country participate in public discourse without entering politics? I think in a democracy this is the right of a citizen, the people of a country to discuss matters that affect them and their lives. In an authoritarian state, the people are expected to shut up and just obey. So, if the people indulge in public discourse, are they committing a crime here? Looks like so leh, according to this interpretation. It only permits 3 types of people to talk cock. How many people qualify as poets, philosophers and public intellectuals here and can be given licence in public discourse? Who says we can speak freely and those who think otherwise are having a wrong perception?

The uneasy silence

Last week The Sunday Times published an article by Nur Dianah Suhaimi on the least favourite child. I commented about the article here and in mysingaporenews. Both were greeted with an eerie silence. That is uniquely Singapore. Turn the other way to be safe. There was also no follow up on the article in the Straits Times. It appears to be a red herring and finding no takers. Surprisingly, The Sunday Times reported that more than 300 emails replied to the ST forum and a few were selected for printing today. If what I read is representative of the 300 emails, we are making progress in this area. The replies were positive and progressive. As a minority, there were discrimination but the thorn is on the issue of NS in the Army. And the Malays felt that they have to work harder than anyone to be successful. This was what my parents told us when we were pathetically poor in the 60s. We were not fortunate to be from an affluent or well to do family. And much more effort is needed just to keep up. What is important is the spirit of wanting to compete and preparing to work harder and knowing that it can bring results. There is also a confidence that they can do it, and many have proven so, competing in the same playing field and excelling. We have our fair share of history and historical baggages. What is important is to leave them behind and move forward. Some things cannot be changed quickly but change they will. I think we are not stagnant in this area and if we keep on progressing, we can make this a better place for all. If we can make it so good for foreign talents, there is no reason why we cannot make it better for the Made In Singapore. Made in Sin for short.

The Golden Formula

Yes it works. After testing it out for the last decade or so, the formula works and is showing results. Singapore is finally on the road to an Olympic medal, maybe even a gold. The whole nation was glued on the TV screen, sharing the oohs and the aahs, one moment thumping in triumph, the next moment the heart sank in despair as our table tennis players battled the South Koreans for a place in the final. After 1960, we have nothing to shout or look for at the Olympics except to send a couple of calefares, for the experience. And we echoed that sports was about participation and sporting spirit. Win or lose did not matter. But sports has transformed itself into a different kind of battlefield for nations to stamp their mark of success. Millions and billions have been spent on sports and sporting talents to win that gold medal. The money is no small change and every country is doing it, grooming and paying their local talents or buying foreign talents. We are no exception. Tonight is a big night for Singaporeans. Even the live telecast of the National Day Rally has been delayed to make way for the table tennis final when midget Singapore will take on mighty China. You can bet, critics or supporters alike will be glued to the TV, biting their nails and groan when we go down to China. I can't imagine the explosion of joy if the Great Wall crumbles. We can see more of such events in the future now that the golden formula has been confirmed to work. If we increase our budget tenfolds, we could have ten times to cheer and feel elated. But that might be asking for too much. Perhaps we can be more targeted in spending the money by going for individual sports. One talent is enough to win a gold. Go to Jamaica for sprinters, and Australia for swimmers. Discover a raw diamond that may turn out to be a Bolt or a Phelp. An Olympic gold is not within our reach. We can afford it.

Myth 187 - The Opposition will destroy the country

Anwar Ibrahim will destroy Malaysia. A Jihad has been called to defeat him. He is a monster and that is what the Malaysian ruling party would want the Malaysians to believe. We are also hearing similar calls at home. The opposition will destroy the country. When the opposition comes into power, Singapore will be finished in a matter of a few years. This is what the Messiah of Doom is saying. How many believe in the Messiah? For what I can remember, Singapore prospers and is what it is today because our forefathers voted in an opposition. And the opposition was not a monster or irresponsible people. They were men and women committed to build a better nation for all Singaporeans. For the believers of the Messiah of Doom, they must believe in a few assumptions. One, the opposition are evil men out to destroy the country. Two, the electorates are fools and reckless and will vote fools and reckless people to govern them. Three, what we see is what we get, and what we are seeing of the opposition are not very encouraging. Four, when in power, the opposition will sack all the able civil servants and bring in a team of retards to help them plunder the country. I think it is very unkind to make assumptions that the opposition leaders are evil men who have nothing better to do than to scheme to destroy the country. And it is also very insulting to belittle the electorate to think that they are unthinking and foolish enough to vote any joker to Parliament. If that notion is true, then all the elections in the past years was a joke and jokers were voted to Parliament by a foolish electorate. The electorate are no fools and will use their vote wisely. When the time comes for them to vote in an opposition, it will mean that the opposition has put up good and decent people to be elected. What we are seeing is only a temporary state of things. The few opposition leaders we are seeing is not a good example of the things to come. And when good opposition candidates are voted to govern the country, you can bet that they will be reasonable and able people and will be supported by all the talents in the civil service and all sectors of the society. We cannot simply dismiss the opposition as irresponsible adventurers who are out to destroy the country. The future of every country is in the opposition, just like when our forefathers voted in the opposition to bring us to what we are today.

NMP taking the lead

Loh Choon Yong and Professor Thio Li-ann are tabling a motion in Parliament to debate on the issue of a by election, a need triggered by the demise of Ong Chit Choon, MP in a GRC. What is surprising is not that such a motion was initiated by the NMPs, but the law that needs to be discussed and amended. Which law? 'Under the current Act, no writ shall be issued unless all members of a GRC vacate their seats. The Act does not provide any timeframe for a by election to be called, merely stating that the President shall issue any writ and stipulating hwo far in advance Nomination Day should be scheduled.' I quote from today. The ridiculous nature of this law is evident for all to see. How could this be our law? Why does it take so long to be noticed and to be raised? Or how did it become our law? This is an example of why checks and balances are necessary and important to ensure that our laws are fair and equitable. But again fair according to who, equitable according to who? These are subjective stuff and to those who passed this law, it is very equitable and very fair, and good for the country. Let's see if Loo and Thio could get this law amended and be prepared to hear some gems coming from Parliament in the defence of this law.

More changes in mindset

The new mission of education, according to Eng Hen, is 'imparting values by engaging a more questioning young generation, while keeping them rooted to Singapore.' The message is loud and clear. Any jokers going into cyberspace forums or blogs and telling people not to kpkb, not to question, not to think, or get out, better read this message again. For I will report them to Eng Hen: ) Today's young are expected to be questioning. So those who were brought up in the era of not questioning should retune their frequencies and start thinking. Thinking is now expected. My god. Masters student Wilson Tan was doubtful if this is possible. With people questioning more, it will lead them to demand for more space, freedom and autonomy. How to reconcile these expectations in an authoritarian state when authority must be obeyed, people must not be seen or heard? Eng Hen disputed Wilson's comment that we are 'a bit stifling.' It is only a perception. Really? How many of you think that it is only a perception and not the reality? And who causes this perception, who causes a few generations of Singaporeans ended up as unthinking and fear of thinking or questioning? Would this new quest to engage the young into thinking and questioning be real? Can we simply tell the young that they should start to do this in schools when the whole system is proclaimed as authoritarian and authoritarianism is the new model for economic progress?

The end of wedding dinners

This tradition of holding wedding dinner in posh hotels is coming to an end, at least for the average Singaporeans. The rich can continue to have their expensive and once in a life time wedding, and ensuring that every wedding dinner is different and memorable. But with the kind of pricing and the hongpao that must be appropriate, the guests will find it quite unaffordable. A $400 hongpao for a couple is getting to be the norm. And in hot or favourite months, one can easily receive two or more invitations. This is going to be a big financial burden to bear for many who are trying to make ends meet. A time will come when invitation to a wedding dinner will not longer be welcomed and be frown upon. And do not be surprised when one of these days the invitation will be thrown back in the face of the bride and groom. It could be seen as a kind of social extortion. We need to look for a cheaper and reasonable alternative. The church wedding, the void deck wedding or maybe a buffet lunch wedding may become more practical. Brides and grooms beware. Your invitation may become offensive.

Top rated men and top team

LKY said we have a Division One team in charge. And the team is made up of top rated men and women. The best surgeons, doctors, lawyers, soldiers, architects, men at the top of their profession. Is this what a top political leadership team should be? Or can top professional skills be translated into passion and caring for the people, to uplift the quality of lives of the people? Is a top medical man or legal man automatically becomes a good political leader? Yes, we have the best brains, academically and professionally, from the various professions. Sometimes I got this feeling that they are better off remaining in their own profession and making themselves rich and contributing more in an area that they are excellent in. We not only need top talents, but we need top talents that are willing to serve and not self serving. I am not saying that our top talents are self serving. I am saying that national leaders are best when they are more selfless and put more priority into serving the people. I think it is safer to claim at this point that our leaders are all selfless and the people's welfare is their top priority. But as we go down the road this may not be the case. We have seen this blind worship of talents becoming a virtue here. Talents are embraced like gods or idols, even if they are found to have serious character flaws, cheats, or plunderers of public funds. When the society or people can no longer see more than one metre ahead and do not place much importance to integrity and high morals, where else can we go? Soon we will be clamouring for cheats to be Prime Ministers. No sweat as long as they are talented. No need to fear a third division team to destroy the country. A Division One team with one or two cheats could do more harm than a weak team.

Surest sign of decline

The boom years of the 70s and 80s are over. Those were the real golden years when everyone is upgrading and improving their lives. Today the decline has set in. There is still great growth to the very rich. These are the people that are living it off and having the best of everything. These are the people, the same few people, that are buying up the high end properties, their 6th or 10th properties, maybe 20th. The affluence is confined to a smaller and smaller circle. Compare to the 70s and 80s, there was a general uplifting of the standard of living of the majority of Singaporeans. The people were moving from rented flats to 3rm flats, 3 rm to 4rm, to 5 rm and to private properties. Everyone is looking to move to a bigger flat or a private property every few years. What is happening today? Dr Beng Teck Liang, a member of the PAP's Policy forum council found out that 'When it comes to money woes, the hardest hit are those living in 4 rm HDB flats.' They are not able to pay their utilities bills and would be better off to downgrade to 3 rm flats. They simply cannot afford to live in 4 rm flats. Huh? What's happening about more good years? And this is the biggest group of people in trouble. Mah Bow Tan is even considering mean testing for HDB flat applicants to make sure they can afford to buy 4 rm flats. How come 4 rm flat is now beyond the reach of so many Singaporeans? Why are they so unaffordable when our economy is growing by leaps and bounds and our country is getting richer and richer? Are we saying that our people are getting poorer and poorer or because everything is getting more expensive? On the other hand we are hearing that Singapore is populated by jet setters and trend setters and their lifestyles revolve around Formula One car racing. It is more likely that paradise and hell are existing side by side.