The media reported that 8,000 people attended Tan Jee Say’s rally last night at Toa Payoh. The social media reported that the crowd was at least 30,000 strong, with pictures to show. Between 30,000 and 8,000, a simple estimate can be made by a quick glance as the difference is vast.
Claiming 8,000 as 30,000 or 30,000 as 8,000 is simply idiotic and unbecoming. Someone’s integrity is at stake.
8/24/2011
The Establishment strikes back
The reason for grabbing the 26 sites in Aljunied GRC could be due to the difficulties faced by PA in getting sites for its activities in Hougang. This is the reason reported in the media today. So, to protect its interests, to be able to get sites for its community events, the PA arranged with the HDB to ‘chope’ the sites first.
This has led to an open accusation by the WP that HDB or the PA is abusing their authority. And it looks like WP has all the facts in their favour and may take the next step, to haul the two agencies to court. Unprecedented and unbelieveable. Historically it was always the establishment taking its political opponents to court. Now it is the other way round.
How would this be played out in court and would the WP be victorious in their charges? This may not be that important. It is the publicity in the media of the abuses of authority by govt agencies, if can be proven, that will steal the limelight. And a few heads will roll when they failed in the defence of their actions. And there will be red faces if someone is found to have sanctioned the act or authorized it. Tony Tan said must get to the facts.
This is something that is good coming out of the Presidential race. The pro establishment candidates have to make a stand. And they made their stand for fairness, justice and equality. Tony Tan even called for an investigation to see to it that justice is seen to be done. Cheng Bock said the incident was sad and called for respect for the elected representative of the people. Was there disrespect shown? Who has the audacity to show disrespect to an elected representative of the people? Definitely not any civil servant or community leaders. If there is, then an apology is only appropriate.
Tan Jee Say and Kin Lian too were unhappy that such abuses happened in this way. Both called for a non partisan civil service and to treat all MPs equally and with respect. What is scary is that if there are people who think they can show disrespect to MPs. Hopefully this issue will be put to rest with the PM making a public statement to warn anyone intending to do so. Then there is the possibility of the case going to court and a court punishment, if it can be proven.
Election rivalry and politicking should end after the GE and both sides should close rank to work together, even if their positions are different. Trying to upstage another using unfair tactics is not only unacceptable but a poor reflection of the integrity of any party caught with its pants down.
Would this be the last case of such ugly incident? PA has withdrawn its conditions to prevent opposition MPs from using its leased sites provided the event is non political. As a political student, everything is political, and everything is non political. Would the PA like to clarify on this position? Is a cycling event organized by a political party a political event? Is a seventh moon festival where a MP is invited a political event? When does an event become political?
This has led to an open accusation by the WP that HDB or the PA is abusing their authority. And it looks like WP has all the facts in their favour and may take the next step, to haul the two agencies to court. Unprecedented and unbelieveable. Historically it was always the establishment taking its political opponents to court. Now it is the other way round.
How would this be played out in court and would the WP be victorious in their charges? This may not be that important. It is the publicity in the media of the abuses of authority by govt agencies, if can be proven, that will steal the limelight. And a few heads will roll when they failed in the defence of their actions. And there will be red faces if someone is found to have sanctioned the act or authorized it. Tony Tan said must get to the facts.
This is something that is good coming out of the Presidential race. The pro establishment candidates have to make a stand. And they made their stand for fairness, justice and equality. Tony Tan even called for an investigation to see to it that justice is seen to be done. Cheng Bock said the incident was sad and called for respect for the elected representative of the people. Was there disrespect shown? Who has the audacity to show disrespect to an elected representative of the people? Definitely not any civil servant or community leaders. If there is, then an apology is only appropriate.
Tan Jee Say and Kin Lian too were unhappy that such abuses happened in this way. Both called for a non partisan civil service and to treat all MPs equally and with respect. What is scary is that if there are people who think they can show disrespect to MPs. Hopefully this issue will be put to rest with the PM making a public statement to warn anyone intending to do so. Then there is the possibility of the case going to court and a court punishment, if it can be proven.
Election rivalry and politicking should end after the GE and both sides should close rank to work together, even if their positions are different. Trying to upstage another using unfair tactics is not only unacceptable but a poor reflection of the integrity of any party caught with its pants down.
Would this be the last case of such ugly incident? PA has withdrawn its conditions to prevent opposition MPs from using its leased sites provided the event is non political. As a political student, everything is political, and everything is non political. Would the PA like to clarify on this position? Is a cycling event organized by a political party a political event? Is a seventh moon festival where a MP is invited a political event? When does an event become political?
8/23/2011
What is the presidential election about?
Some wanted to vote for a dignified face to show the world. Some wanted a wise looking one. Some wanted one that can carry himself well when in the company of foreign dignitaries. Some wanted a president that they can shake his hand and take photograph with. Some wanted a nice guy. Some wanted a moderate and reasonable guy.
What is the most important issue of this presidential election? Checks and balance. We have a strong govt, in fact a very strong govt. Like in all strong and powerful regimes, sometimes thing may go wrong. And when things go wrong, we want someone to stand up and say ‘Stop.’ We want someone to be there, constantly watching and checking, not someone going around to be a nice guy, a popular guy, shaking hands with everyone, or trying to cosy up to the Prime Minister, to be in his good book, so that he will be more disposed and amiable to suggestions and views.
The check on a rogue govt is not what a nice guy can do. If we are serious, we need to find the right guy with the right temperament and intent, to do the job. The people must not be distracted by all the wishy washy nice to have or nice to be presidential pursuits. Only one thing counts. For the rest, a good looking nice guy president, you only need a ceremonial one. And there is no need to go for an election.
The act of electing a president is to give him the moral and legal rights to stand up to a rogue govt. He is there, elected by the people, with the people behind him, to speak and protect the interest of the country, and the reserves. The people must think very carefully who they think can do this job.
Who can provide the checks and balance in the most objective and impartial way, without fear or favour? With proper decorum of course.
What is the most important issue of this presidential election? Checks and balance. We have a strong govt, in fact a very strong govt. Like in all strong and powerful regimes, sometimes thing may go wrong. And when things go wrong, we want someone to stand up and say ‘Stop.’ We want someone to be there, constantly watching and checking, not someone going around to be a nice guy, a popular guy, shaking hands with everyone, or trying to cosy up to the Prime Minister, to be in his good book, so that he will be more disposed and amiable to suggestions and views.
The check on a rogue govt is not what a nice guy can do. If we are serious, we need to find the right guy with the right temperament and intent, to do the job. The people must not be distracted by all the wishy washy nice to have or nice to be presidential pursuits. Only one thing counts. For the rest, a good looking nice guy president, you only need a ceremonial one. And there is no need to go for an election.
The act of electing a president is to give him the moral and legal rights to stand up to a rogue govt. He is there, elected by the people, with the people behind him, to speak and protect the interest of the country, and the reserves. The people must think very carefully who they think can do this job.
Who can provide the checks and balance in the most objective and impartial way, without fear or favour? With proper decorum of course.
The PA is a non political organization
The People’s Association is a statutory board and a non political organization. Who dares to challenge its non political and non partisan status in organizing community services? Even the community centres, now called community club, are not called political clubs or associations.
There is no politician in the organizations. Oh the MPs are only advisors of grassroots organizations which are also non political. The Chairman of the PA, someone told me is the Prime Minister. OK, he is the Chairman but not there as a politician. Maybe the Chairman’s position is akin to the President of Singapore, non political, a unifying figure, non partisan.
All of PA’s premises are out of bound to politicians. Even those common areas it leased from the HDB are only for non political community events. MPs cannot attend as they will make the event political. I think, correct me if I am wrong, an MP cannot go to the community club to pee if nature calls. It is strictly non political and does not need the presence of any political animal to tarnish its clean and non political image.
Please feel free to disagree with me. I never say that everything I said is 100% correct. Sure there are things that I said were wrong or wrongly conceived. Sure I must have made many mistakes. Please forgive me. I am just a lesser mortal.
Cowboy country or Rule of Law
The lunatic fringes are lurking in the cowboy country in cyberspace. In the other physical dimension there are all kinds of rules and laws governing the citizens and the lunatic fringes. I am presently surprised that there are more rules than I have thought of that are enforceable by the men in blue.
I read a case of a TOC reporter being hauled to the police station by the transport authority for taking photographs of an accident involving buses. According to the transport official, the organization has rules that forbid the public from taking such photographs. Though the police initially said that there was no case, they eventually took down the particulars of the photographer at the insistence of the transport official. Not sure if the photographer has to submit a report of the incident.
This is especially frightening to me as an avid photographer. Now I am not sure when a private organization is going to drag me to the police station for violating their company rules and regulations. Scary isn’t it? Would the police be kind enough to enlighten the ignorant public of such private rules and regulations and whether the police will apply these private laws to apprehend the public.
We also have a non political organization like the PA with the authority to ban elected representative of the people from public functions because they have ownership of the property by virtue of a lease. I cannot imagine property owners renting their properties to individuals and forbid them from inviting politicians to their premises. The Workers Party is reported in the Today paper for accusing the HDB for abuse of authority by leasing common areas to the PA which then forbids MPs, unless appointed as grassroots advisers, from attending functions held in those properties.
Funny that a non political organization like the HDB ‘is abusing its powers as land owner of common property in HDB estates to help the PA(another non political organization) achieve the political objectives. The part in within inverted commas was quoted from the Today paper.
Very strange developments. Non political organizations somehow seen as playing politics or achieving political objectives. I am sure the HDB and PA are doing everything within their constitutions and rules and regulations as non political organisations, and their actions are all within the principles of rule of law. I am wondering what would happen if an opposition MP invited himself to a community event in a PA leased property that forbids his presence? Would the police be called in to take down the MP’s particular and record a statement from the MP?
Rule of law is good as it makes it very clear what the citizens can or cannot do. What is troubling is that many of these rules and laws are private and not known to the public and many innocent people with no intent to break these rules of private authorities will be caught unguarded. Perhaps organizations like the transport authority could publish all the forbidden rules in the media to help the public to avoid violating their rules and laws. And all organizations with their private rules and laws should also do so.
I will stay indoor for the next 6 months until all the private authorities publish their rules and laws affecting the public. Then only will I feel safe to step out of my flat. And definitely I will not dare to take photographs of public transport vehicles and their activities. Maybe I should hang up my camera for good. I am a law abiding citizen and will obey all laws as long as they are laws. If the karang guni man has his own laws, I will also make sure not to infringe them. Life can be quite scary in a country run by the rule of law.
I read a case of a TOC reporter being hauled to the police station by the transport authority for taking photographs of an accident involving buses. According to the transport official, the organization has rules that forbid the public from taking such photographs. Though the police initially said that there was no case, they eventually took down the particulars of the photographer at the insistence of the transport official. Not sure if the photographer has to submit a report of the incident.
This is especially frightening to me as an avid photographer. Now I am not sure when a private organization is going to drag me to the police station for violating their company rules and regulations. Scary isn’t it? Would the police be kind enough to enlighten the ignorant public of such private rules and regulations and whether the police will apply these private laws to apprehend the public.
We also have a non political organization like the PA with the authority to ban elected representative of the people from public functions because they have ownership of the property by virtue of a lease. I cannot imagine property owners renting their properties to individuals and forbid them from inviting politicians to their premises. The Workers Party is reported in the Today paper for accusing the HDB for abuse of authority by leasing common areas to the PA which then forbids MPs, unless appointed as grassroots advisers, from attending functions held in those properties.
Funny that a non political organization like the HDB ‘is abusing its powers as land owner of common property in HDB estates to help the PA(another non political organization) achieve the political objectives. The part in within inverted commas was quoted from the Today paper.
Very strange developments. Non political organizations somehow seen as playing politics or achieving political objectives. I am sure the HDB and PA are doing everything within their constitutions and rules and regulations as non political organisations, and their actions are all within the principles of rule of law. I am wondering what would happen if an opposition MP invited himself to a community event in a PA leased property that forbids his presence? Would the police be called in to take down the MP’s particular and record a statement from the MP?
Rule of law is good as it makes it very clear what the citizens can or cannot do. What is troubling is that many of these rules and laws are private and not known to the public and many innocent people with no intent to break these rules of private authorities will be caught unguarded. Perhaps organizations like the transport authority could publish all the forbidden rules in the media to help the public to avoid violating their rules and laws. And all organizations with their private rules and laws should also do so.
I will stay indoor for the next 6 months until all the private authorities publish their rules and laws affecting the public. Then only will I feel safe to step out of my flat. And definitely I will not dare to take photographs of public transport vehicles and their activities. Maybe I should hang up my camera for good. I am a law abiding citizen and will obey all laws as long as they are laws. If the karang guni man has his own laws, I will also make sure not to infringe them. Life can be quite scary in a country run by the rule of law.
8/22/2011
‘Yao yao ling xian’ Tan Jee Say in the lead
After two and a half days of poll and 207 votes, Tan Jee Say is way ahead of all the other candidates with 74% of the votes. Tan Cheng Bock is maintaining his second position with 15% and Tan Kin Lian taking third place with 5%. Tony Tan is coming from behind at 4%.
I know that this poll is not a true representative of the whole population and would not ensure a Tan Jee Say win. What is pertinent is that among the anti PAP voters, the majority is throwing their votes to Tan Jee Say.
If that be the case, if my earlier estimate holds, that is a split of 50:50 between pro govt and against govt votes, Tan Jee Say is going to garner at 74% of the 50% or 37% of popular vote. This will definitely put tremendous pressure on Tony Tan. If he is going to split 30:20 with Tan Cheng Bock, then Tan Jee Say is in.
I know that this poll is not a true representative of the whole population and would not ensure a Tan Jee Say win. What is pertinent is that among the anti PAP voters, the majority is throwing their votes to Tan Jee Say.
If that be the case, if my earlier estimate holds, that is a split of 50:50 between pro govt and against govt votes, Tan Jee Say is going to garner at 74% of the 50% or 37% of popular vote. This will definitely put tremendous pressure on Tony Tan. If he is going to split 30:20 with Tan Cheng Bock, then Tan Jee Say is in.
A sense of propriety or impropriety
We have heard it all. We know now what the Elected President can or cannot do. We know what he can or cannot say. We even know that for him to say no to a rogue govt wanting to spend the reserves is a lost cause. An EP can only deal with a govt that will play ball and respect the Constitution. A rogue govt will just bundle the EP out of the Istana without any decorum.
We have 4 candidates. One is saying that he will just play his role as prescribed by the Constitution. Period. Another knows of his limitation and will abide by the Constitution but will find other things that are interesting for him to do. Another two are increasingly aware of what they cannot do but will just try to make more noises to be heard. In summary, we have a ceremonial president with a lame duck role to go against a rogue govt. Another Singapore Myth.
In the case of Tan Kin Lian and Tan Jee Say, the awareness of the little things that they can do independently must have dawned on them that they should not be asking for too much pay. What is enough for the kind of jobs that the EP is doing, reading prepared scripts, inviting people and friends for tea, shaking hands and taking pictures and inviting people to his garden? I don’t think the EP could do anything on the most important role he is expected to do. Oh, I forgot that he needs to lend his rubber stamp for the appointments of senior govt officers and a few other things. He can say No!
So Tan Kin Lian feels ‘peh seh’ and say he will take only 50% of his pay if elected. The other 50% can go to charity. Tan Jee Say gone one step further by saying only $500k is enough. They must be feeling quite embarrassed to receive the multi million dollars on the table. They must have looked at the job and feeling very uneasy with the money, maybe feeling shameful too.
It is good that they have some sense of propriety, to know that it is wrong to accept more than what they have contributed. For all the misgivings, I like them for such a sense of honesty and reality.
8/21/2011
Paya Lebar CCC banned MP Chen Show Mao
The news that MP Chen Show Mao has been banned from attending a Seventh Moon Celebration is circulating in the internet and social media. Or is it the People’s Association that is banning him from the event? It was reported that the piece of land for the celebration is under the jurisdiction of the PA which is a non political organisation. So like the community clubs, all activities on its land or premises must not be political. MPs are seen as political. Advisors to CCCs or MCs are not political as they are not wearing the MP hat. Whatever, I am embarrass trying to understand the logic and reasoning.
Coming back to the issue, does the CCC or the PA has the right or authority to ban any citizen from attending a function, be it social, cultural, religious or private functions like wedding or birthday celebrations? If anyone is to ban any person from an event, it must be the organisers and their private functions.
The second point to ask is whether such organisations can ban an elected MP from anything at all? Are they the law, the police or the govt? Is such an act a challenge to institution of the Parliament?
One thing I am still confused in this country that is ruled by law. Does the presence of a MP make an event political? Does a wedding become a political event when an MP is invited? Can an MP enter a community club in his capacity as the MP regardless of his political affiliation? Or is an MP a disease, cannot go about interacting with the citizens?
An MP is good enough to sit in the Parliament, the highest legal body of the country, but can an MP be forbidden to enter a community club or attend a community event in any place in the island, a public place or a private home? As a reminder, the community clubs are built by the people’s money, and not somebody’s grandfather’s money. An MP is also a citizen and an elected representative in Parliament.
I think the Presidential hopefuls may want to have a view on this matter. Those attending their public forums may want to pose this question to them. The MP is part of the legislature that makes law for the country. No one or organisation should do anything to insult the office of an MP.
Would our honourable and learned friends try to interpret the law to see if there is any violation in this regard? I think many would rather play it self, so safe that today, the presidential hopefuls seem to be seeing many things that out to be put right in the run up to the election, from who has the right to be sitting in the Istana to what the President should be doing.
PS. It was quite a joke that the MPs of west Malaysia can be banned from entering east Malaysia. Very third world thuggish behaviour.
The Tan Dilemma
The Hainanese Clan has invited Tan Jee Say for tea. And someone asked me if the Hainanese Clan be accused of participating in politics? My answer is simply no. The election of the President is a non political event. I know many political science students are covering their mouths to hide the cheeky smiles on their faces. It is not a political event, or the candidates are independent, and have no political affiliations. So be it.
And no one can point a finger at the Hainanese Clan to register as a political party if they want to be involved in politics. Such childish innocence is passé. Who ever dare to utter such a remark today will make himself looking quite foolish.
With the Tan Clan being the first clan to step forward to endorse Tony Tan, the door is left wide open for any clan or association, union or trade organisation to endorse any candidate, and not be accused of dabbling in politics.
This reminds me of the Tan Clan decision to endorse one Tan against the other three Tans. I am sure the other Tans must be feeling very let down by their own clan. They are all Tans and share the same ancestors. Why the favouritism for one against three.
This must be what I called the Tan Dilemma. How did they get caught in such a tricky situation to hurt the feelings of three for the good of one? Have they not heard of the slogan, one for all and all for one, staying united?
Their decision to support one Tan is very divisive. I thought it would be a wiser decision to support all four Tans and let the rest of the Tans vote for whoever they want. An even hand would look more pleasant for all the Tans. Have they compromised their position to treat all fairly and equally?
Can the other three Tans approach the Tan Clan for an explanation and endorsement?
8/20/2011
Tan Jee Say taking a big lead in Polls
My straw poll is up for 24 hours and 146 have voted with106 for Tan Jee Say, 24 for Tan Cheng Bock, 9 for Tan Kin Lian and 7 for Tony Tan.
Yes, if this was done by any media, they will blow it as their front page news as if Tan Jee Say is going to win the Presidency. But as many of you have pointed out, a poll conducted here, in the ST, in Reach or in TRE will reflect certain kinds of results reflecting the inclination of the participants. This is only natural and, I don’t have to remind any of you here as you are very rational and thinking people, I would like those who tend to take media reports at face value to be careful about such biases in polls and news.
The result of this poll so far is quite a true reflection of the kind of people visiting cyberspace looking for alternative news. They are informed and wanted to be more informed and would not allow anyone to pull wool over their eyes. For the moment, we can assume that the voters in the poll are quite genuine and this is what they truly wanted. This does not rule out a big block of voters coming in to vote for any one of the candidates here to swing the poll to their favour.
What is clear is that though Tony Tan is claiming endorsements from unions, clans and associations, these too may not say much as to who the members of these organisations will vote eventually. This poll shows that there are other corners of the population that have a mind of their own and some would favour other candidates very strongly, and that candidate may not be Tony Tan.
We still have 5 more days before polling day and we shall watch how the poll goes and how representative is a non partisan and non aligned blog like this one when match to the real election outcome.
Just keep an open mind.
8/19/2011
Who will be the next President
Hi,
I have set up a poll on the right to get an indication of who you people would like to see as the next President. Let's see if what we think is a reflection of what the people think on 27 Aug.
Cheers.
I have set up a poll on the right to get an indication of who you people would like to see as the next President. Let's see if what we think is a reflection of what the people think on 27 Aug.
Cheers.
Notable quote by Franklin Roosevelt
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have enough. It is whether we provide enough for those who have little."
Franklin D Roosevelt (1882-1945)
United States, 32nd president
Franklin D Roosevelt (1882-1945)
United States, 32nd president
How to grow our reserves?
It is a state secret how much of our reserves are CPF money, or the people’s money. Anyone has the figure? I think the CPF component is not small and could be a very substantial portion of our national reserves. And I find this very funny, and very painful. Why is it that the people’s money, your money, my money becomes the country’s reserve? Never mind, it is part of the economist’s formula, to include the people’s money as the country’s money for the govt to crow about while the real owners of the money can only cry about it.
With this in mind, the easiest way to grow the reserves is to make sure that there is more money in the CPF. How to do that? I think we all know the answers. I can make our reserves even bigger and tell you that it is safe, without telling you how much is there as long as the CPF account holders are happy with the monthly statements.
So, how rich are you? Or how rich is the country’s reserves? Your money or someone else money?
I am very frighten of people who claims to be able to grow the reserves.
The President, gambler and fund manager
The campaign for the next Elected President has commenced and what came to my mind is the relationship between the president, the gambler and the fund manager. They all have one similar interest, money. Money is a big issue not just about how much should the president be paid given the surprising revelation of his job by the Law Minister. The only part that justifies some big money is the president’s role as a custodian to the country’s reserves.
The rest of the functions of the president are more ceremonial and quite exciting, like in the company of heads of states, the kings and queens and dining with celebrities. I think many rich and successful people are dying to be in such a position and would even pay for it. As for the money part, what does the president do and how much is he deserving is now questionable.
Let me start with the gambler. Simply put, the gambler takes chances by placing his bets. When he loses, he blames it on bad luck. When he wins, he can brag about his gambling skills. In a way the fund managers also places his bets which he calls its investing. And he employs very talented and highly qualified people to justify what he is doing. All done carefully, objectively, with charts and figures. No guess work. When he makes money, he too will brag about how clever and talented he is. When he loses, there are always the forces beyond his control or he is investing in the long term. He will have the long term to cover his bad bets.
There are some startling differences between a gambler and a fund manager. The gambler’s cost is only himself. And he gambles with his own money. The fund manager pays all the top talents a fortune to place his bets. And when he loses, even in hundreds of billions, it is always other people’s money, not his money. He always wins with his huge pay packet and huge cuts in winnings. He is much better than the gambler in many ways.
And when a fund manager loses big, he can go to the president for more money. Here is the relationship. The Elected President is there to say yes or no to the fund manager gambling with the country’s reserves. But how can the EP say no when the fund manager says he is investing in the long term and will win back all his money in a matter of time? His short term loss is due to circumstances beyond his control.
What if the Elected President says no? He can be removed as the fund manager can claim that he is opposing his instruction. According to the Law Minister, an Elected President that challenges the govt can be removed. So how? Does the Elected President have any machinery or forces behind him to take on the govt? The govt is in control of everything, the media, the uniformed services, the civil services, the Unions, the clans and all govt related agencies and institutions. How could an Elected President say no to a ruling govt when he can be simply removed?
Here comes the question of his $10m pay. Should the president be paid $4m -$10m to say no when he can’t really say no? And this is the reality if one listens to the campaign speeches of the presidential hopefuls. They want to do all kinds of things that are nice to have but really quite irrelevant, and do not justify the money or the position. Who cares what they want to do? What is important is his ability to make sure that the reserves is not squander away. But can the EP do it?
The rest of the functions of the president are more ceremonial and quite exciting, like in the company of heads of states, the kings and queens and dining with celebrities. I think many rich and successful people are dying to be in such a position and would even pay for it. As for the money part, what does the president do and how much is he deserving is now questionable.
Let me start with the gambler. Simply put, the gambler takes chances by placing his bets. When he loses, he blames it on bad luck. When he wins, he can brag about his gambling skills. In a way the fund managers also places his bets which he calls its investing. And he employs very talented and highly qualified people to justify what he is doing. All done carefully, objectively, with charts and figures. No guess work. When he makes money, he too will brag about how clever and talented he is. When he loses, there are always the forces beyond his control or he is investing in the long term. He will have the long term to cover his bad bets.
There are some startling differences between a gambler and a fund manager. The gambler’s cost is only himself. And he gambles with his own money. The fund manager pays all the top talents a fortune to place his bets. And when he loses, even in hundreds of billions, it is always other people’s money, not his money. He always wins with his huge pay packet and huge cuts in winnings. He is much better than the gambler in many ways.
And when a fund manager loses big, he can go to the president for more money. Here is the relationship. The Elected President is there to say yes or no to the fund manager gambling with the country’s reserves. But how can the EP say no when the fund manager says he is investing in the long term and will win back all his money in a matter of time? His short term loss is due to circumstances beyond his control.
What if the Elected President says no? He can be removed as the fund manager can claim that he is opposing his instruction. According to the Law Minister, an Elected President that challenges the govt can be removed. So how? Does the Elected President have any machinery or forces behind him to take on the govt? The govt is in control of everything, the media, the uniformed services, the civil services, the Unions, the clans and all govt related agencies and institutions. How could an Elected President say no to a ruling govt when he can be simply removed?
Here comes the question of his $10m pay. Should the president be paid $4m -$10m to say no when he can’t really say no? And this is the reality if one listens to the campaign speeches of the presidential hopefuls. They want to do all kinds of things that are nice to have but really quite irrelevant, and do not justify the money or the position. Who cares what they want to do? What is important is his ability to make sure that the reserves is not squander away. But can the EP do it?
8/18/2011
An embarrassing moment repeating?
The likeable George Yeo could not imagine that he could be bundled out of a general election. Frankly, I too was surprised by his defeat and the losing of 5 super talents in one go. On reflection, none of them should take it personally as the defeat was not their fault. There was a change of wind. The defeat was a defeat of the PAP. Too much, too long, the PAP has overstayed its welcome and the people were looking for a change.
There was resentment too. The policies of the past decade have alienated the people to a point that the anger must be released. And George Yeo and his team were the unfortunate scapegoat. Nothing personal.
The present election for the EP could see another embarrassing moment being repeated. The possibilility of Tony Tan losing the election is very high despite all the endorsements from all corners appearing in the media. Endorsements by office bearers and committees are different from the feelings of the rank and file. The elite will think differently and may want to sit in the same table and sing the same song. The masses, the ordinary people, may have a mind of their own and want to do their own thing.
Don’t be surprised if Tony Tan did not make it to the Istana. What if he loses his deposit? That will be terribly embarrassing. But again, it has nothing to do with him. The vote against him is likely to be a vote against the ruling party. For the moment Tony is the front runner with endorsements from every where. He is having a good start.
Strange for me to look at the Presidential Election in this manner as it is not meant to be partisan or political while my whole reasoning is about politics, nothing but politics.
Would we see the knuckle duster again?
My article on Lee Hsien Loong’s National Day concessions is pretty generous and I thought for a start it is quite promising. There are other perspectives that are calling for more changes while some are asking for compensation for the wrongs and damages done by past policies. These are very serious in monetary terms for those badly hurt by the education policies and housing fiasco that were trumpeted as great jobs done. They were nearly awarded the public stars. We know that they are now history, good riddance.
Hsien Loong has taken a more conciliatory approach to deal with the problems, used to be called achievements, created by policies of the past few years. Trying to accept them and see them as problems and looking for solutions to them must be quite pressurizing. It could be different, a triumphant glory, if they were painted as great policies and nothing needs to be done. As things are, there is an admission that not all are right or good stuff. Some were blatantly disgusting.
What if Hsien Loong took the kpkbs negatively, or someone suggested to him that he needs to be tough, never retreat under pressure, never allowed the people to make demands on him, and offers him the knuckle duster? If that happens, I can easily foresee the following developments.
There will be a clamp down on new media. There will be people being sued. There could be midnight callers. And Hsien Loong could appear on national TV to speak to the people in a different tone. He may even shed some tears for the tough measures that he had to take against the detractors, all for the good of the country. The country will be pitched to be in a state of crisis, and tension would spread across the island. Some may end up as bankrupts, some may escape from paradise.
And all the ministers who were stripped from their posts will be resurrected and elevated to high pedestals, as heroes who made tough decisions. Only strong and good leaders are capable of making tough decisions even when the policies hurt the people badly. But there is always the long term good to preach. In the long run, like from a distance, the earth looks so beautiful, and everything will turn out well.
And everything goes on as usual, with all the past policies in force. Property owners will be smiling when property prices shoot to the sky. CPF holders will be smiling when they read their monthly statements. Foreign talents will be smiling everywhere and telling their country men that Singapore is a paradise. And more foreigners will be queuing up to come to paradise. Some will be pointing to the jams everywhere as signs of progress and vibrancy.
There will be high economic growth and prosperity, at all cost. And everything else is just an aspiration, except money in the pocket.
Telling the President hopeful's fortune
My bookie came to see me for guidance on the Presidential Race. He has faith in my clairvoyance ability and also my skills in fixing numbers. Of course I obliged when there is a big angpow waiting for me.
So I took out a wash basin, filled it with holy water, threw in a few twigs of pomegranate leaves. Then I lighted three joss sticks and got into a prayer for my spiritual guide.
The result of my spiritual trip was most enlightening. 50:50, a touch and go Presidential Race. How does this works out? In the last GE, PAP garnered 60% of popular votes. This time around, they are likely to get only 50% for the following reasons. It is not about electing a govt. That has been confirmed and no risk in electing whoever as the President. It would still be a political contest between the PAP and the non PAPs.
The second point is the lost of faith in the govt and its policies. People are getting very cynical and are questioning how these policies are benefiting them. Many have great doubts. Many too have great doubts in the abilities of the super talents giving the fiascos in the surge in population, high property prices and the lapses/bad policies to build more flats, to provide the infrastructure for the big influx of foreigners. And there are the big losses in our sovereign funds, the failure in our education system to produce top talents leading to such a pathetic state that Singaporeans have to depend on foreigners to come here to help them. Not enough hospitals or not enough lower class wards. There are many more things that have inundated the Singaporean minds.
The third point is the need for a strong President to check on a rogue govt led by a rogue PM. Singaporeans may be daft, or some people may think so. But no Singaporean is going to believe that an independent director handpicked and paid by the management can be an effective watchdog to monitor the wrong doings of the management. This principle is applicable to the Elected Presidency. But some daft Singaporeans will not think, and will still be deceived. Serious and rational thinking Singaporeans, and there are many out there, will want to vote for a truly independent individual that can check on the govt.
The votes will be split evenly for various reasons, between the two pairs of candidates, Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bock versus Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian. The former have strong links with the govt and the latter are seen as more independent or not related. Now let’s look at the numbers. With 50% each, Tony and Cheng Bock are likely to split their votes between 20:30 and 24:26, likely in favour of the former. In the Jee Say/Kin Lian camp, it could be the same split and would make the contest that more interesting.
What other factors could be thrown into the computation to make the difference? The controversy over Patrick Tan is still hanging over Tony’s head and if there is a whistle blower, this could completely demolish his chances, and the biggest beneficiary will be Cheng Bock. In the case of the rest, anything can happen. Who knows when a monkey will escape from the zoo to accuse one of them of stealing his peanuts? Or some jokers may stand out to complain of losing paper clips.
For the moment it is 50:50 and depending on the combination, both sides will have a candidate that may tip the scale. Will the people vote for a pro PAP President or an independent President? Sorry, wrong choice of words. All the candidates are independent of political parties and are standing on their own. They have no links with any political parties. This is a completely non political election, get it?
The people are quite lucky to have four highly qualified and respectable men, with good reputation and integrity, to choose from. Now who is going to win? Let me toss my dice….
So I took out a wash basin, filled it with holy water, threw in a few twigs of pomegranate leaves. Then I lighted three joss sticks and got into a prayer for my spiritual guide.
The result of my spiritual trip was most enlightening. 50:50, a touch and go Presidential Race. How does this works out? In the last GE, PAP garnered 60% of popular votes. This time around, they are likely to get only 50% for the following reasons. It is not about electing a govt. That has been confirmed and no risk in electing whoever as the President. It would still be a political contest between the PAP and the non PAPs.
The second point is the lost of faith in the govt and its policies. People are getting very cynical and are questioning how these policies are benefiting them. Many have great doubts. Many too have great doubts in the abilities of the super talents giving the fiascos in the surge in population, high property prices and the lapses/bad policies to build more flats, to provide the infrastructure for the big influx of foreigners. And there are the big losses in our sovereign funds, the failure in our education system to produce top talents leading to such a pathetic state that Singaporeans have to depend on foreigners to come here to help them. Not enough hospitals or not enough lower class wards. There are many more things that have inundated the Singaporean minds.
The third point is the need for a strong President to check on a rogue govt led by a rogue PM. Singaporeans may be daft, or some people may think so. But no Singaporean is going to believe that an independent director handpicked and paid by the management can be an effective watchdog to monitor the wrong doings of the management. This principle is applicable to the Elected Presidency. But some daft Singaporeans will not think, and will still be deceived. Serious and rational thinking Singaporeans, and there are many out there, will want to vote for a truly independent individual that can check on the govt.
The votes will be split evenly for various reasons, between the two pairs of candidates, Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bock versus Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian. The former have strong links with the govt and the latter are seen as more independent or not related. Now let’s look at the numbers. With 50% each, Tony and Cheng Bock are likely to split their votes between 20:30 and 24:26, likely in favour of the former. In the Jee Say/Kin Lian camp, it could be the same split and would make the contest that more interesting.
What other factors could be thrown into the computation to make the difference? The controversy over Patrick Tan is still hanging over Tony’s head and if there is a whistle blower, this could completely demolish his chances, and the biggest beneficiary will be Cheng Bock. In the case of the rest, anything can happen. Who knows when a monkey will escape from the zoo to accuse one of them of stealing his peanuts? Or some jokers may stand out to complain of losing paper clips.
For the moment it is 50:50 and depending on the combination, both sides will have a candidate that may tip the scale. Will the people vote for a pro PAP President or an independent President? Sorry, wrong choice of words. All the candidates are independent of political parties and are standing on their own. They have no links with any political parties. This is a completely non political election, get it?
The people are quite lucky to have four highly qualified and respectable men, with good reputation and integrity, to choose from. Now who is going to win? Let me toss my dice….
8/17/2011
Voting for a LPPL Elected President?
Following the public exchange of views on the role of the President, Law and Foreign Affairs Minister K Shanmugam has upped the ante by making a not-so-veiled threat – claiming that the President can be removed from office if he attempts to go against the government.
The above is quoted from an article by Tanya Wei in the TRE. After reading this and Shanmugam’s example of a British King that lost his throne for challenging the elected govt, I got this very uneasy feeling. I am wondering whether I should laugh or throw out at the thought of electing a President that would be removed from office if he goes against the govt.
What is the key issue concerning the Elected President today? The high salary and the ceremonial role of the EP are just side issues. What is upper most in the people’s mind is the power to go against the govt to protect the reserves. The people want an EP that would go against the govt when the time calls for it.
Now we are told, or warned, or implied, or kind of threatened, that if the EP is to go against the govt, like saying no to spending the reserves, he will be removed.
Put it simply, why have an EP in the first place? Some are calling this election a sham. It is looking more like a LPPL President just for show and will be removed when he is needed at the critical moment. It reminds me of the fate of Ong Teng Cheong.
What’s happening?
The above is quoted from an article by Tanya Wei in the TRE. After reading this and Shanmugam’s example of a British King that lost his throne for challenging the elected govt, I got this very uneasy feeling. I am wondering whether I should laugh or throw out at the thought of electing a President that would be removed from office if he goes against the govt.
What is the key issue concerning the Elected President today? The high salary and the ceremonial role of the EP are just side issues. What is upper most in the people’s mind is the power to go against the govt to protect the reserves. The people want an EP that would go against the govt when the time calls for it.
Now we are told, or warned, or implied, or kind of threatened, that if the EP is to go against the govt, like saying no to spending the reserves, he will be removed.
Put it simply, why have an EP in the first place? Some are calling this election a sham. It is looking more like a LPPL President just for show and will be removed when he is needed at the critical moment. It reminds me of the fate of Ong Teng Cheong.
What’s happening?
PAP beating a retreat
3 May at Fullerton Square, Lee Hsien Loong apologised to the people on behalf of the govt. It was an ominous gesture for the PAP. The GE saw the defeat of a key minister and the lost of a GRC. George Yeo had seen it coming. He related an incident to Hsien Loong of a voter telling him he was going to vote opposition a couple of days earlier.
The aftermath of the GE saw the stripping of 3 ministers from their posts and the stepping down of LKY and Goh Chok Tong. Since then, the PAP must have taken George Yeo’s advice seriously to reflect on themselves and their policies. And it has been on the defence, retreating all the way from their arrogant and I know best ways.
Many policies were revamped and the kpkbs of the people were taken heed. Yes, the PAP is taking very seriously the noises made by the people. The callous and bullying housing policies were dumped with a new minister in Boon Wan taking charge. He is not dictating to the people to live by his terms like his predecessor, but going all out to build more flats to meet the needs of the people, to restrain the rising property prices, telling the applicants not to screw themselves up by blindly applying for a flat with anyone in a hurry.
Measures were taken to slow the pace of immigrations even after LKY had said that another 900,000 foreign workers were needed. The MOM has come out with new regulations to limit a free flow of foreigners like TGIF. In a way Hsien Loong was arresting the fears of young Singaporeans losing out in the job market to hungrier FTs.
The cries for more university places were also heard and more places will be squeezed out for Singaporeans, with the intake of foreign students frozen at the current level. Yes, he is saying Singaporean First and doing it.
The new media is not giving up with their attacks and demands for a more Singaporean centric govt and policies. The new media was tolerated and permitted to carry on as usual, with bigger space to air their views.
The issuing of 4 COEs to presidential hopefuls is unthinkable and unprecedented. With all the discretion in the hands of the govt, it could easily tighten the screw and push through its endorsed candidate in a walkover by rejecting the other candidates. It was a huge concession, a huge step backwards, to appease the anger of the people.
Shanmugam, the elite and top notched lawyer minister was lambasted and had to beat a retreat from his interpretations of what a EP can or cannot do. Any minister or MP trying to make clever talks were not spared and were hammered relentlessly, including presidential hopeful Tony Tan, once a PM potential. The other once arrogant ministers were no where to been seen, probably trying to live by the new mantra that they are the servants and not the lords of the people.
The retreat by the PAP under Hsien Loong’s leadership is not in disarray. It is a measured retreat, taking a stand here and there not to concede too much ground. All the concessions were in response to the feedbacks from the people, primarily from the new media. The govt may not admit it officially, but there is a big battle going on with the govt taking stock of its positions and responding with changes in its policies.
Hsien Loong is leading the govt with a completely new style from his predecessors. Could he do otherwise if he is going to regain the confidence and trust of the people, and to extend PAP’s rule into the future? Another big concession is waiting to be served, the slashing of ministerial salary, including that of the ceremonial President. How much and how far will Hsien Loong be able to engage the people while on the defensive is still unfolding. The day is young.
The aftermath of the GE saw the stripping of 3 ministers from their posts and the stepping down of LKY and Goh Chok Tong. Since then, the PAP must have taken George Yeo’s advice seriously to reflect on themselves and their policies. And it has been on the defence, retreating all the way from their arrogant and I know best ways.
Many policies were revamped and the kpkbs of the people were taken heed. Yes, the PAP is taking very seriously the noises made by the people. The callous and bullying housing policies were dumped with a new minister in Boon Wan taking charge. He is not dictating to the people to live by his terms like his predecessor, but going all out to build more flats to meet the needs of the people, to restrain the rising property prices, telling the applicants not to screw themselves up by blindly applying for a flat with anyone in a hurry.
Measures were taken to slow the pace of immigrations even after LKY had said that another 900,000 foreign workers were needed. The MOM has come out with new regulations to limit a free flow of foreigners like TGIF. In a way Hsien Loong was arresting the fears of young Singaporeans losing out in the job market to hungrier FTs.
The cries for more university places were also heard and more places will be squeezed out for Singaporeans, with the intake of foreign students frozen at the current level. Yes, he is saying Singaporean First and doing it.
The new media is not giving up with their attacks and demands for a more Singaporean centric govt and policies. The new media was tolerated and permitted to carry on as usual, with bigger space to air their views.
The issuing of 4 COEs to presidential hopefuls is unthinkable and unprecedented. With all the discretion in the hands of the govt, it could easily tighten the screw and push through its endorsed candidate in a walkover by rejecting the other candidates. It was a huge concession, a huge step backwards, to appease the anger of the people.
Shanmugam, the elite and top notched lawyer minister was lambasted and had to beat a retreat from his interpretations of what a EP can or cannot do. Any minister or MP trying to make clever talks were not spared and were hammered relentlessly, including presidential hopeful Tony Tan, once a PM potential. The other once arrogant ministers were no where to been seen, probably trying to live by the new mantra that they are the servants and not the lords of the people.
The retreat by the PAP under Hsien Loong’s leadership is not in disarray. It is a measured retreat, taking a stand here and there not to concede too much ground. All the concessions were in response to the feedbacks from the people, primarily from the new media. The govt may not admit it officially, but there is a big battle going on with the govt taking stock of its positions and responding with changes in its policies.
Hsien Loong is leading the govt with a completely new style from his predecessors. Could he do otherwise if he is going to regain the confidence and trust of the people, and to extend PAP’s rule into the future? Another big concession is waiting to be served, the slashing of ministerial salary, including that of the ceremonial President. How much and how far will Hsien Loong be able to engage the people while on the defensive is still unfolding. The day is young.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)