Low Thia Khiang wrong in LUP

According to Lim Yuin Chien, Press Secretary to the Minister for National Development, Low Thia Khiang was wrong to think that just because he was the MP he should lead the LUP programme. An adviser who is a grassroot leader appointed by the Govt is the rightful person to do so. The details of the all the reasons are in his letter in the ST forum today. Anyone has a different view, politically, constitutionally, administratively or whatever? Would the highly analytical and professional media experts be interested to do an in depth study on this issue by consulting more experts, including legal experts and explain the position from an disinterested angle? Somehow I got this feeling that all the eminent experts will not have any opinion on this issue. I can expect silence. The LUP is a govt programme and how and when a LUP should be launched to benefit the residents should be in accordance to some objective criteria. Whether the blocks of flats are in govt run constituencies or opposition constituencies should not be a factor in the formula for such a programme. The govt is for all citizens. The govt's fund belongs to the citizens, not someone's private savings. Should the criteria for LUP be transparent and made known publicly so that the people know when their flats are due for LUP? Should the priority of an LUP be influenced by lobbying, talking to ministers by MPs or grassroot leaders, or any other subjective factors? I think there must be a standard criteria and SOP in the ministry for such a programme and no amount of lobbying or differential access should be allowed for any precinct to jump queue or be left out of the programme. I may be too idealistic and naive to make such an observation.

Why blame the PRs?

12 October 2009 China woman took up Singapore PR for 'easier travel' I read with outrage a ST Forum letter written by a China national praising Zhang Yuan Yuan, the Singapore PR who declared her loyalty to China on CCTV. It is already ridiculous that a China woman with just a diploma can apply and get PR status in just two months. Accusing Singaporeans of 'naivety' and 'insecurity' is plain outrageous! The fact that Ms Zhang does not hide her true intention of getting PR for the purpose of easier travel is not an indication of her 'pragmatism' or 'motivation'. It is a perfect example of a greedy foreigner taking advantage of the PAP's overly liberal immigration policies for personal benefit. Period.... The above are the first few paragraphs of an article posted in Singapore Dino blog. Apparently there have been many criticisms of Zhang Yuan Yuan for marching in the China National Day Parade. I personally feel that the anger directed at Zhang Yuan Yuan is misplaced and rather unfair to her. She is NOT a Singapore citizen. Period. However foolish we choose to include PRs as if they are part of our citizens or residents, it is our own doing. A PR is just a citizen of another country being granted the right to stay here permanently but never, and not our citizen. The PR has all the rights to be loyal to his/her our country of which he/she is a citizen. The fault lies with us. If there is anyone to be blamed, blame it on ourselves. If we want to grant PRs so happily, citizenship so easily, why blame those who go by the rules and accept our PRs or citizenship? If we want people to take advantage of us, why blame on others for taking advantage of us? As if we do not know what is the intent of many of these PRs? If we want to be hardup and go on our knees to beg people to come here knowing that they are only here when the going is good, why be angry with them and not with our own stupidity?

Eric Low sure win Hougang in next GE

Below is an article posted in SingaporeKopitiam by Temaseksg. With all the good works he is doing in Hougang, and the Lift Upgrading Programme which Low Thia Khiang failed to bring to his constituency, Eric must now be the hot favourite to win Hougang. PAP’s Eric Low claimed credit for bringing LUP to Hougang .... Speaking to the state media yesterday, Eric “Chiku” Low who claimed during the 2006 elections that the Hougang “chiku” was ripe for picking before losing to Workers’ Party strongman Low Thia Kiang, he attributed Hougang being selected for the LUP to his relentless and unyielding efforts: “Though I was not elected, I have been trying hard to lobby the authorities including National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan to upgrade the lifts in Hougang. Now that the lifts will finally be ugraded, I am extremely satisfied about it.” Mr Eric Low also said he is willing to stand in Hougang as a PAP candidate in the next election if the party decides to keep him. He revealed that he will be setting up a PAP kindergarten in Hougang next year which will charge 20 to 30 per cent less than private operators....

What is public interest?

We had been hit by a continuous barrage of articles that were deemed news worthy during the Aware saga and the recent Miss Singapore World scandal. The amount of information and effort spent on these two issues, the number of space allocated to report on them, must have given the public the impression that these were two very serious issues that were affecting the lives of Singaporeans, or at least Singaporeans were nosey and lapped them up with glee. We had a few reports of the LUP in opposition wards and the prominent role played by grassroot leaders over the role of elected MPs. There must be many interesting angles to look at this development, from the constitutional, political and party politics angles. I am hoping that this will be news worthy enough for the issue to be discussed at least for a month with the main media giving it an in depth coverage, front page and centre spread. Looks like this issue is of not much public interests and has died a natural death after a couple of reports and a letter from Low Thia Khiang. Not news worthy. Does not affect the lives of Singaporeans or our political system and culture.

CPF annuity take up rate encouraging

The scheme was announced in February last year followed by promotions and free gifts of $4000 for those who signed up early. 200,000 invitations were sent out to those eligible and 11,787 have signed up. This is an encouraging figure. What, less than 6% signed up for such a good deal? Another 500,000 invitation letters will be out in the next round to encourage more people to sign up. These belong to the group that has escaped the compulsion net. Singaporeans are really hard to please. With such a well thought out scheme, all devised for their own good, and with early bonus of $4000! Why aren't Singaporeans rushing or queuing up for such a great scheme? Singaporeans are known for their kiasu mentality and ability to smell out a good deal. And when there is one, you can bet that they will queue up overnight for it. When there is money to be made, the Singaporeans will be there. The scheme was announced in February last year followed by promotions and free gifts of $4000 for those who signed up early. 200,000 invitations were sent out to those eligible and 11,787 have signed up. This is an encouraging figure. What, less than 6% signed up for such a good deal? Another 500,000 invitation letters will be out in the next round to encourage more people to sign up. These belong to the group that has escaped the compulsion net. Singaporeans are really hard to please. With such a well thought out scheme, all devised for their own good, and with early bonus of $4000! Why aren't Singaporeans rushing or queuing up for such a great scheme? Singaporeans are known for their kiasu mentality and ability to smell out a good deal. And when there is one, you can bet that they will queue up overnight for it. When there is money to be made, the Singaporeans will be there.

Myth 213 - Competition is fictional in monopolistic environment

While my dreary eyes are still half open on a Sunday morning, I have woken up to a new truth. Competition in a market with only two monopolistic players can be good and true to the spirit of bringing better quality of services and goods and lowering cost. This is exactly what is happening in the tussle between SingTel and Starhub. Despite the fact that SingTel is paying $400m or double of what Starhub was paying for the rights to screen EPL, it is charging its customers less. How could this be possible beats me. There must have many things up their sleeves, eg efficiency, more advertisers, more cost cutting measures, or maybe they are doing national service. Whatever, Singaporeans and football lovers have woken up to a pleasant surprise this morning. At least the $23 package to watch EPL will be around for one year. And all the other services provided by SingTel are competitively priced against Starhub, and cheaper. I will strongly recommend that we should have two organisations building public flats for Singaporeans. This will definitely bring the price of flats down. Long live free competition, in the uniquely Singapore way. All the other industries and service providers should follow the example of SingTel to provide better quality services/goods at lower fees. SingTel's CEO Allen Lew deserves an equivalent of the Nobel Prize in Economics if he can pull this through over three years without significantly increasing the subscription fees.

Low Thia Khiang is furious

Finally he spoke out after months of silence. He was literally left out in the cold in the current Lift Upgrading Programme. He was expected to put in his thumb print while Eric Low front up in announcing the LUP for Hougang. The grassroot adviser, not the elected MP, took on the leadership role to run the constituency. Oops, let me correct this. The grassroot adviser took on the role to announce the Lift Upgrading Programme. What other important roles he was involved, like deciding which precinct or flats that are deserving, how much etc, I am not sure. The MP, the representative elected by the people to look after their affairs and the estate has been sidelined. Here we have an MP, not part of the ruling govt, but a representative in Parliament, and an adviser, not part of the govt, but an appointee of a ruling party, both contesting to serve the residents. Who should do the job? Who has been chosen by the people to do the job? The answer seems simple enough. But is that so? HDB has given all its right and good reasons why the grassroot leader should do the job. Period. Whose money is involved in the LUP, people's money, govt money, or party money? Now, what has Chiam See Tong got to say on this? He is also affected, I think. Would he write another letter to the ST forum like Low Thia Khiang?

A curious letter in My Paper

Teoh Kueh Liang wrote to My Paper saying 'Govt should take the lead in hiring older workers'. Now where has Teo Kueh Liang been? The govt has been taking the lead in this area for many years. Just look at the cabinet? No, not the one in the kitchen. Or look at the Istana. Or look at the board of directors of all the govt linked companies and stats boards. Then do a count on the number of oldies in them, starting from the Chairman down. The govt has been the leading light in hiring oldies all these years. It is all there for the people to see. What would be nice is to have some top jobs like Chairman and Presidents to go on a rotation, a one year term for each incumbent. Then many Singaporeans could benefit from the experience to be in such positions and would appreciate the problems the country is facing better.

An amusingly frightening article

Last week I read an article by William Pesek in the ST explaining how China is at the brink of collapse or implosion. According to him, China is facing a mountain of problems that will pull it down. As a history student, I knew that China had collapsed 200 years ago, a broken country stricken with poverty, lack of industry, penniless, infested by warlords and foreign pests. Why is China facing imminent collapse today when it is the second most powerful country in the world, rid itself of all the foreign pests, warlordism, poverty and a reserve of US$2 trillion? China has muslim separatist problem that it could not handle, widespread corruption, an economy that is too export oriented and if America refuses to buy Chinese products, the factories will close shop. And there are in fighting among the Chinese leaders when Jiang ZeMin stood side by side with Hu JinTao at Tian An Men to view the parade. But the most serious problem China is facing is the reserve of US$2 trillion which it does not know what to do with. I thought I was reading an essay from a secondary school kid that is still in dreamland and highly intoxicated by the western media point of view. Is the Uigher separatist movement a problem to China? With a continent as huge as Europe and a 1.4b population, what is Uigher? China could simply designate a small corner of Xinjiang and called it the reservation to protect the Uighers and send all of them there, like the Red Indians in the US. Make sure they can get in but cannot get out. Any Uigher found outside the reservation should be arrested and send back to the reservation. Close the gates to the reservation, cordon it off with one of its armies and forget about them. See, problem solved. No American wants to buy cheap Chinese goods? The Chinese goods are now like drugs to the Americans. They need them desperately as no one could sell them as cheap and as good. The average American is broke and needs cheap stuff from China. The presence of Jiang together with Hu was to show how close the Chinese leadership is. From Deng to Jiang and to Hu, they are not building dynasties, they are not installing their princelings to perpetuate their rules. What rubbish about infighting? The western media can only hope that the Chinese leaders will fight among themselves by sowing seeds of discontent, conceiving imagination and presenting it as real. And about the US$2 trillion problem! I think every govt would wish to have this problem. They will crawl to Beijing to beg for the US$2 trillion problem to be theirs. It was a rubbish article that is most amusing and naive. But many readers will believe that China is in serious trouble after reading it.

Unappreciative and ungrateful Singaporeans

I read in some blogs and forums that Singaporeans are getting more angry with HDB inspite of the revelation that all the complaints about first time buyers not getting their flats were ridiculous. Mah Bow Tan has also quoted statistics, statistics, to prove the HDB case that the complaints were unjustified. And some were so angry to even call for voters to vote out the govt. So serious meh? Can't they see that Mah Bow Tan and the HDB were working their guts out to make sure that HDB flats are affordable and available to fit everyone's budget? There is an affordable flat somewhere for everyone. Just don't be choosy. Now which side of the story deserves more merits?

Ming Yi found guilty of fraud

Goh Kah Eng or Ming Yi and Raymond Yeung were both found guilty of fraud, falsifying documents and misappropriating funds. Ming Yi was a high profile monk, well known for his self sacrificing acts to raise funds for his charity works, to help the needies and poor. But some how inside Ming Yi there is a Goh Kah Eng that did not go away. And being the human part, Goh Kah Eng succumbed to the temptation of greed. Very sad that even a high profile monk could not overcome such temptation. Now I am growing to appreciate our system more for its incorruptibility. And the incorruptibles are deserving to be immortals and demigods, undefeated by temptation and greed.

Housing shortage problem solved!

50 to 60% of BTO applicants did not take up the flats offered to them. And the excuses they gave for not taking up the flats were more spurious than genuine. The conclusion, first timers applying for flats, most or almost all, will be successful. So there is no shortage of public housing problem. And I would suggest that there is no need to put up more BTOs in a hurry. What for, when there is no real urgency? Putting up more will only lead to a glut and over supply. Come to think of it, under the BTO scheme, if anyone applies for it and failed to get a flat, then something must be seriously wrong with the system. It is built on demand. And application is submitted 3 or more years in advance. How can any applicant failed to get his flat? The failings are first timers who needed a flat fast, not having to wait 3 or more years. This is the crux of the problem. In 3 years, many things can happen. The marriage may even be called off, or the couple may strike lottery or their income gone above the $8k ceiling, or they may inherit the flats from their parents or someone else. Anyway, the public outcry for shortages in public housing is a hoax, imagination, biased and unfair demand for attention.

Speaking through two holes

HDB has revealed that the take up rate at Punggol Breeze and Fernvale Residence were only 69% and 55% respectively. And according to HDB, the reasons were long waiting time, 3 to 4 years to build, choice units taken up, and maybe distance from MRT stations. But according to HDB, this is a sign 'that first time buyers still have plenty of choices despite the high demand for flats in some areas'. Wow, really ah! And it is good news that HDB will proceed to build these flats as they are confident of sustained demand for public housing. I can give a personal guarantee that all the flats will be taken up when completed. Just turn off the supply. It's elementary Watson! What other reasons for not taking up the BTO flats? I am still scratching my head. Damn difficult to find out the truth.

Putting a tighter leash on Ris Low

It is for her own good. Judge May Meseenas has imposed stricter supervision criteria after Ris Low's probation came up for review. She would now not be allowed to shop alone. And she must continue with her psychiatric treatment. I would presume that the reason for imposing stricter conditions must be due to the supervisee trangressing the limits during the probation period. Now what did Ris Low did to bring about tighter supervision on her freedom? Did she commit or attempt to commit theft again? Or is it because she participated in the Miss World contest? It looks like Ris Low is a danger to herself and to society. It would be better to put her on a leash or in a lockup.

Myth 212 - Free competition is good

Over the years we have been creating a few fictional warlords to compete with each other for monopolistic businesses and we claimed that they are good. Competition means better quality, efficiency and competitive pricing. Then some quietly merged again, probably realising that it was all a hoax. Now we have two out of three media/entertainment providers competing with each other to see who can pay more to acquire rights to entertain the consumers. And all must be doing it for the good of their consumers. The consumers can expect better quality programmes at lower or more competitive cost. Now, would the programmes be better now that Singtel had almost double the bid price to acquire the rights for EPL etc? Would the consumers be paying more or lesser after this great and free competition? Someone was shouting 'Singapore Premium ah!' behind my back. It is so easy to make money from Singapore. No problem actually when we have so much money to spend, OPM.

No lawsuit is the way to go

Two letters by Dr Chong Yeh Woei, President, 50th Council, Singapore Medical Association and Associate Professor Goh Lee Gan, President and Council, College of Family Physicians Singapore, were in the ST forum to defend the medical profession after Salma Khalik's article 'Tame doctor's greed and protect patients'. The medical profession must feel aggrieved by the statement that doctors are greedy and needed to be tamed. In some profession or businesses, such an allegation may bring about a series of charges and impending lawsuits to sue the party to bankruptcy. It is most pleasing to read the counter arguments by the two doctors to defend their profession and not to go for litigation. This is a sign that our society has progressed, matured and people are wise and reasonable enough to engage in fair discussion. Oh, I heard of the several suggestions in the recent Miss World contest that some of the contestants may be sued. I hope not and rationality and good sense will settle whatever issues that are in the heat. We don't need more litigations to settle disputes. Leave litigations to those with a lot of money to spend or to bully those who cannot pay the huge legal fees.

Responsible role of media

Dawn Tay, 'the media's role is to ensure accountability. Between pageant organisers and beauty queens, and the country they represent. Between newspapers and readers, to whom the press has responsibility to uncover the truth for.' The above is quoted from an article by Dawn Tay in My Paper today. She went on to justify 'the steady stream of reports by various media, which shed more light on the saga and eventually forced pageant organiser ERM World Marketing to break its silence last Monday.' With such a high standard set by our media, we must feel confident that any dubious activity or less than righteous happenings will be fully reported with the same zeal and conviction as the indiscretion of a 19 year old kid who cheated a few thousand dollars. We should soon be able to read more reports about cases involving millions. Actually no. Singaporeans don't cheat, except kids. Singaporeans should thank the media for their strong commitment to uncover and report the truth.

Salary cap for head honchos of State Owned Enterprises

China has initiated a cap on the salaries of the CEOs of their SOEs. At the moment the highest paid CEO from China National Offshore Oil Corporation, CNOOC, earns $2.5m. The next highest earns half of this amount. And the third is only paid less than $300k a year. Other perks not included. Given the scale of their operations and revenues, the salaries earned were peanuts. The head honchos should submit an appeal to compare their salaries with those CEOs of similar industries to get a fair salary. They are obviously very underpaid for the responsibilities they are shouldering. Or at least they can compare their salaries with our CEOs to give a picture of how lowly paid they are. They can quote Singapore as a role model of transparency and good corporate govt and we are paying should be fair and good. And they have been copying Singapore in many things and copying the way we pay our CEOs is only natural. And after the comparison, the CEO of CNOOC could easily be in the region of $10m or more. How could they justify to curb their CEO's salaries when they are so indecently underpaid? If they do that, they must be prepared for more corruption in high places.

A storm in paradise

Typhoon Ketsana is sweeping through the Philippines and threatening the lives of millions of Filipinos. 7.5 richter scale earthquake hit Padang and Bengkulu in Indonesia, burying villages and villagers and flattening towns and destroying lives and properties. No amount of international aids can minimise the pain and suffering of these affected people. In paradise, our media were flooded with news of a storm in the form of boomz and rats. Some had a good laugh but some were dead serious. On reflection, we are very blessed as a little country. We are spared from the ferocity and rages of nature. We are blessed with an able govt that is working so hard to make this a better paradise everyday. Are we lucky? We have our little irritations and irritants in our midst but more like the itches of mosquito bites. Nothing earth shattering or crisis like except for the little recklessness in the financial flirtation with making easy money and with no regards to responsibilities. From the big picture we are indeed very fortunate and a paradise. We have good govt and public administrators working their guts out for the people. But there are still some little people with small hearts that are making decisions that will affect adversely the lives of our people. The earlier we get rid of them the better. We cannot have small people with small hearts to make public policies and decisions for the people. In govt and public services, we need people with a different mindset, people with ideals and with a big heart to serve the people, to want the best for the people. A good example is the expectation in public housing and the way it is heading. There are little people who think that the losers in life should be happy if they have a roof over their heads, even a dog kennel will do. And it is ok to pay a life time, spending a big chunk of their income just to have a roof and 4 walls around them. Whatever, a flat is just that. You do not need to pay a lifetime for it. The govt needs to relook at the housing policy, how small it shall go and no further, and how much it shall cost and no more. And it is bad to have people waiting for 3 years just to get a roof over their head. The HDB was very successful in their early days to provide a roof to anyone who needs it. It only took a few months from application to moving in. This is a good and excellent policy for the people. But some jokers think that this was bad. People must made to wait. Waiting for 3 years is good, or normal. I want to use the four letter word here. A little oversupply of public housing is good. A 80 sq m 3 rm flat or a 90 sq m 4 rm flat must be the bottom that we should go in building homes for our average citizens. Going smaller is bad. The small 1 or 2 rm rental flats must be temporary shelters for those who have lost their ways or their luck ran out on them. Those must not be considered as the standard for a decent living for our people. We are using state land and public money and we must use them wisely and with a little generosity for the good of the people. To have good public policies favouring the people, we need good govt. And good govt must not be contaminated with little people with small hearts.

Stupidity or good business sense?

The football fans are fuming at the recent successful bid by Singtel to host the EPL. They have to switch programme provider and inconvenience and cost immediately become an issue. It was reported that Singtel paid a bomb of $400m for the rights, more than Starhub's $212m. The fear of having to pay more by the consumers is justified. Singtel is not going to do charity and will have to recover the cost from somewhere, sometime. But the fear may be unfounded. Singtel said that the aggressive bid was done with the 'intent to hold retail prices stable'. So the consumers need not fear. They should cut out this phrase from the newspaper and paste it over their TV screen and when the time comes to pay more, they can bring this up to Singtel. But of course by then the circumstances will have changed and all the additional costs could be justified by many other reasons. Having said that, consumers and the public should praise Singtel for its successful bid and for its well meaning intent to keep cost stable. OK, I confess that I am not sure what is the definition of the word 'stable'. Just like the word affordable, it can mean anything to anyone. All things will come to a happy ending, stupidity or clever business strategy, someone will have to pay for it.