The Online Citizen, 25 Aug 2011
There are rumours circulating online that Presidential candidate Tan Jee Say gatecrashed Singapore People’s Party’s (SPP) National Day dinner last Saturday (see HERE).
A Workers’ Party member Melvin Tan who contested in the 2006 General Election, writing a note on his Facebook said that he has chosen to vote for Dr Tan Cheng Bock over Mr Tan Jee Say because Mr Tan Jee Say seem to have “an air of superiority” around him, and also because he did not like how Mr Tan “heckled Tony Tan” in TOC’s ‘Face to Face 2′ Presidential Forum.
That Facebook note is now being circulated widely online.
In the same note Mr Melvin Tan said:
“The last straw was the SPP National Day Dinner on 20 Aug ’11, where I bought tickets to attend to support Chiam See Tong for all he has done for Singapore. TJS (Tan Jee Say) turned up and in my view gate-crashed the event and stole the limelight. From very reliable sources, that wasn’t pleasant for the Chiams or SPP.”
TOC tried to clarify this with SPP and spoke to Dr David Tan, Central Executive Committee member of SPP.
Dr Tan in speaking to TOC said, “It’s untrue! I invited Tan Jee Say in my personal capacity to the dinner. Mr Tan initially declined because of his prior commitments. But later, because of my insistence, he agreed to drop-by to say hello to the Chiams and myself.”
Dr David Tan was Mr Tan Jee Say’s teacher when Mr Tan was a student in Raffles Institution.
When informed that Mr Tan Jee Say would like to drop-by the party to greet the Chiams, Mr and Mrs Chiam welcomed him, clarified Dr David Tan.
Why would this Melvin Tan come out with such a statement that unwary readers would form a bad impression on Tan Jee Say at a critical moment like this? Why, why. why?
Let me think. A lot of conspiracy theories appeared in my mind. For someone who wanted to be an MP, it can be expected that he would make such statements only if the facts were correct. Why would he make such a statement only to be proven wrong immediately by the organisers?
Fishy eh?
8/26/2011
New clothes maketh a new man
Are Singaporeans mortals or higher mortals, or simply robotics? We have a Presidential election tomorrow. From the onset of this election the Singaporeans were told that this is a non political election. The Elected President is non political and is above politics. There is no politics involved here, but the higher national interests. So Singaporeans all went about garbling that the election has nothing to do with Singapore’s politics.
Next came the candidates for the presidency. Three resigned from their political parties only a few days ago, and one resigned several years back. All claimed to be independent of any political parties or association. And all claimed that they are now new men and will not be influenced or affected by their past associations. The apolitical Office of the Presidency is safe. It will not be tarnished by any swine that will be elected to serve the interests of political parties.
And no political party stands out to endorse any of the candidates, to keep politics out of the election. Any politicians that endorsed or spoke well for the candidates were speaking in their own personal capacities, with no political agenda.
This is how clean this Presidential election has become. It is a role model for the world to emulate. Change the clothes and change the man. We have instant trees. Now we have instant apolitical men.
My apologies. Think I have a few glasses too many.
Next came the candidates for the presidency. Three resigned from their political parties only a few days ago, and one resigned several years back. All claimed to be independent of any political parties or association. And all claimed that they are now new men and will not be influenced or affected by their past associations. The apolitical Office of the Presidency is safe. It will not be tarnished by any swine that will be elected to serve the interests of political parties.
And no political party stands out to endorse any of the candidates, to keep politics out of the election. Any politicians that endorsed or spoke well for the candidates were speaking in their own personal capacities, with no political agenda.
This is how clean this Presidential election has become. It is a role model for the world to emulate. Change the clothes and change the man. We have instant trees. Now we have instant apolitical men.
My apologies. Think I have a few glasses too many.
Test for daft Singaporeans
This Saturday, 27 Aug 2011, Singapore will again have an opportunity to sit for a test to prove their daftness once again. For so many years, Singaporeans have not only been told that they are daft, they even agreed that it is true and accepted the fact shamelessly.
After a life time of slogging, when many have become grandfathers and grandmothers, when the normal process of growing up and ageing would have made them wiser, they were told that they cannot be trusted with their hard earned money. And this money will be kept away from them, maybe return to them in drips, and in exchange they will be given a piece of paper every month to tell them how rich they are, and also how daft they are.
They were also told that foreigners are here to help them, to create jobs for them. But before doing that, the foreigners would have to take some of their jobs. And if they lost out to the foreigners, they were told to buck up or that they were lazy, less competitive and must go for retraining, for a lower skill job than before. And also, the foreigners are here to help to increase the value of their properties that they cannot sell. For after selling, they would not be able to afford to buy the next property except by downgrading.
There are many other things that were shafted down their throats to confirm their daftness. This Saturday, they will be put on another test to confirm how daft they are, or whether they are beyond redemption.
The test is about a Justice Bao, a Song magistrate that was legendary for his impartial dispensing of justice, without fear or favour. This time the daft Singaporeans were told that Justice Bao has reincarnated. He is going to stand for election as the next President. And Justice Bao will uphold justice with absolute impartiality. He will not be affected by his relations with anyone in the execution of his duties. Any govt official that is corrupt will be beheaded under the tiger head guillotine. The Singaporeans are told to elect this Justice Bao the reincarnated as their President. And Justice Bao will demolish the myth that absolute power will corrupt. With Justice Bao as the President, there is no such thing as corruption of power. The more absolute the power the better for Singaporeans, when Justice Bao is around. Singaporeans will once again be told to vote for absolute power.
Would Singaporeans again prove themselves to be daft and vote the reincarnation of Justice Bao to be their President? The verdict will be out by 28 Aug 2011.
8/25/2011
Latest poll numbers
Less than 12 hours from the election campaign and Tan Jee Say is still in the lead with 69%. Overall his votes have slipped by 5% from the day the polls were set up. The other three candidates have a small share each of the 5% votes from Jee Say. Tan Cheng Bock is now at 18%, Tan Kin Lian at 6% and Tony Tan at 5%.
What do these numbers tell? There are a couple of assumptions that can be used to interpret how they would reflect the actual election. One, assuming that all those voting in this poll are anti PAP votes, which is not the case as some still voted for Tony and Cheng Bock is running in second place, and if the overall votes cast against the PAP is 50%, Tan Jee Say is going to garner 34.5% of popular votes. And this is likely to be the base support for Tan Jee Say.
Tan Kin Lian’s position is looking pretty weak and may lose more grounds on actual voting if the voters choose to throw everything with Tan Jee Say.
The big question now is between Tan Cheng Bock and Tony Tan. Theoretically, with all the endorsements, Tony Tan should carry at least 70% of the pro PAP votes. This will put him neck to neck with Jee Say at 35% against Jee Say’s 34.5%.
Tan Cheng Bock will have the balance of 15% plus the anti PAP votes of 9% (18% x 50) giving him 24%. His only chance to be in the running will be to take away more votes from Tony. To give him a real chance of catching up with Jee Say, he will have to take near to 50% of the pro PAP votes, which will give him 34% (25 + 9). 40% will not be good enough.
However, if Tony’s share of the pro PAP votes goes down to 60%, his total is going to be 30% (60% x 50) which will make him precariously close to losing to Tan Jee Say.
What is quite sure in this election is that 40% will be casting against the PAP camp with a likelihood of 50% this time. The pro PAP camp can count on 30% solid support plus another 20% swing votes. So my conclusion is that it will be Tan Jee Say versus Tony Tan or Tan Cheng Bock. It will be very close and if the anger is strong enough against the PAP, Jee Say is likely to be in with Cheng Bock pulling down Tony’s vote but not enough to lift him over Jee Say.
My take is on Jee Say taking a slight edge, beating Tony and Cheng Bock by a nose. But, if the polls here is representing 70% of all voters, less the 30% of hard core PAP supporters, then Jee Say is going to romp in with a comfortable 49% of votes count.
What do these numbers tell? There are a couple of assumptions that can be used to interpret how they would reflect the actual election. One, assuming that all those voting in this poll are anti PAP votes, which is not the case as some still voted for Tony and Cheng Bock is running in second place, and if the overall votes cast against the PAP is 50%, Tan Jee Say is going to garner 34.5% of popular votes. And this is likely to be the base support for Tan Jee Say.
Tan Kin Lian’s position is looking pretty weak and may lose more grounds on actual voting if the voters choose to throw everything with Tan Jee Say.
The big question now is between Tan Cheng Bock and Tony Tan. Theoretically, with all the endorsements, Tony Tan should carry at least 70% of the pro PAP votes. This will put him neck to neck with Jee Say at 35% against Jee Say’s 34.5%.
Tan Cheng Bock will have the balance of 15% plus the anti PAP votes of 9% (18% x 50) giving him 24%. His only chance to be in the running will be to take away more votes from Tony. To give him a real chance of catching up with Jee Say, he will have to take near to 50% of the pro PAP votes, which will give him 34% (25 + 9). 40% will not be good enough.
However, if Tony’s share of the pro PAP votes goes down to 60%, his total is going to be 30% (60% x 50) which will make him precariously close to losing to Tan Jee Say.
What is quite sure in this election is that 40% will be casting against the PAP camp with a likelihood of 50% this time. The pro PAP camp can count on 30% solid support plus another 20% swing votes. So my conclusion is that it will be Tan Jee Say versus Tony Tan or Tan Cheng Bock. It will be very close and if the anger is strong enough against the PAP, Jee Say is likely to be in with Cheng Bock pulling down Tony’s vote but not enough to lift him over Jee Say.
My take is on Jee Say taking a slight edge, beating Tony and Cheng Bock by a nose. But, if the polls here is representing 70% of all voters, less the 30% of hard core PAP supporters, then Jee Say is going to romp in with a comfortable 49% of votes count.
The arithmetic of the 26 sites
The PA is leasing 26 sites from the HDB for community events. How long is the lease and how much would it cost the PA for the lease? The next question is the number of days that these sites will be used.
If the usage of the sites, averaging once a week for each site, it will mean that the sites will be unused for 365 - 52 days or 313 days. Double the usage to 2 days every week, ie Sat and Sun, it will still be 261 days unused. A long lease in such a case would mean that the PA will be paying the HDB 261 to 313 days for not using them. Ok, the rate of rental for long lease could be lower than daily rate.
The question is whether it is cheaper for PA to pay for rental of the sites on a used basis, or daily rate? I don’t have the numbers but I think it will be much cheaper to pay on use than to pay for long term lease when the sites are not intensively used.
Can someone work out the numbers? One thing good about paying from one pocket to another pocket is that it will look good on economic numbers like GDP. Perhaps the PA could sublet the sites at a higher rate with profits.
If the usage of the sites, averaging once a week for each site, it will mean that the sites will be unused for 365 - 52 days or 313 days. Double the usage to 2 days every week, ie Sat and Sun, it will still be 261 days unused. A long lease in such a case would mean that the PA will be paying the HDB 261 to 313 days for not using them. Ok, the rate of rental for long lease could be lower than daily rate.
The question is whether it is cheaper for PA to pay for rental of the sites on a used basis, or daily rate? I don’t have the numbers but I think it will be much cheaper to pay on use than to pay for long term lease when the sites are not intensively used.
Can someone work out the numbers? One thing good about paying from one pocket to another pocket is that it will look good on economic numbers like GDP. Perhaps the PA could sublet the sites at a higher rate with profits.
What is happening in the stock market?
Hundreds of millions have been lost in the stock market by small investors since programme trading, algo and high computers were attached to the system of the stock market. This development means that the big funds are able to take full advantage of technology by plugging their computers into a system that they were once forbidden to do so, and trade against small investors, and cleaning them up.
Nobody is crying foul, or nobody dares to, or nobody wants to. So everyone pretends like there is nothing wrong, just like the toxic notes and Lehman bond crisis. The money lost in the stock market is many multiples of the previous scam and the number of victims were much more numerous.
One day it is going to explode and as usual, everyone will pretend to be ignorant of it. Everyone will say I dunno. Is there anything wrong with the stock market trading system? Is there a level playing field? Are there any violations to the rules and regulations of stock trading?
I swear to god that there is nothing wrong. I think the system is perfect, and volume is increasing and the stock exchange is making a lot more money than before. Those losers just got to blame themselves. I am sure the SGX and MAS know exactly what they are doing and everything is just fine. We can trust the super talents to do their homework as they are paid very well to do their jobs.
Some people have been complaining to me that something is really foul with the system. I disagree completely. But if they do feel strongly that something is wrong they need to prove it. Or they may want to take advantage of the presidential election and bring their grouses to the presidential hopefuls. These are honourable men who have pledged to safeguard the nation’s reserves with integrity. And if the small investors think that are caught in a scam, and brought to their attention, they will definitely take up their case to protect the small investors. They are men of honour and their positions with regards to the banning of MP Chen Show Mao in Aljunied are testimonies to their principles for fair play and justice.
Bring the problems to them and let them raise the issues with the proper authority. For me, I don’t see anything wrong so I would not know what to say. The SRS, SIAS, the broking houses, too are interested parties and they too did not see anything wrong and are not complaining.
Those people who complain about unfair practices, uneven playing field, unfair advantages, may not have a case, I think. If they think they cannot beat the system, don’t get it. It is caveat emptor.
How a LPPL President can be critical to a power shift?
In my earlier article I explained why the EP is at most a LPPL President. His key role to check on a rogue govt is at best a scarecrow attempt. A rogue govt in all counts will be in control of every instrument of the state and would just rubbish the EP if they have to, and there is nothing the EP can do about it. They could crudely bundle him out of the Istana in a gunny sack.
But under certain conditions, the EP is a source of strength in a contest for power and dominance. A likely scenario where the EP can play a crucial role is during a freak election. Take the last GE for illustration. If the PAP had lost the election they will have to rely on the EP for some semblance of authority and legitimacy if they want to take up a fight with the new govt. My speculation below is just for discussion.
When a new party takes office, what it would face is a whole machinery of govt organizations with heads appointed by the defeated ruling govt. The loyalty of these heads, from the military, civil service, judicial and all the ministries are likely to be still with the past govt. And the new govt would have to make changes to be rubber stamped by the EP. See what the EP can do in such a situation? The retention of all the incumbents in office will mean that the defeated party is still the de facto force to reckon with. And the new govt will have a hard time if these heads refuse to tow the line, and cannot be removed because of a veto by the EP.
Any attempt to break the impasse would only lead to more tension, and raises the importance of the EP office that is backed up by all the incumbent heads. Yes, this will include the military, police and all uniformed groups. Someone said they will be called upon to remove a rogue govt or a new govt. Possible, likely? In such a situation, the authority of the EP can be called upon to march out the troops. That is the only legitimate source of power left for the ex govt.
And yes, the EP can block any attempt to touch the reserves with all the govt agencies behind him. He is not a lame duck or a straw man in such a situation.
The EP is the fall back position. And he is worth every cent paid to him when such a situation arises. Don’t pray, pray with the LPPL President. He has a big role to play when a crisis demands it. Other than this, his role is primarily ceremonial. Nathan lives that role perfectly, to the letter in the Constitution. And Tony Tan knows it too. He will be an excellent EP in the same mould as Nathan.
The other 3 candidates appeared to be eager beavers, wanting to do a lot of things that the EP was not designed to do. A strong PM can completely ignore him or shut him off. Can an EP order a PM or minister to listen to his rants or to have tea with him? All they need to do is to tell him they are busy. Period.
But under certain conditions, the EP is a source of strength in a contest for power and dominance. A likely scenario where the EP can play a crucial role is during a freak election. Take the last GE for illustration. If the PAP had lost the election they will have to rely on the EP for some semblance of authority and legitimacy if they want to take up a fight with the new govt. My speculation below is just for discussion.
When a new party takes office, what it would face is a whole machinery of govt organizations with heads appointed by the defeated ruling govt. The loyalty of these heads, from the military, civil service, judicial and all the ministries are likely to be still with the past govt. And the new govt would have to make changes to be rubber stamped by the EP. See what the EP can do in such a situation? The retention of all the incumbents in office will mean that the defeated party is still the de facto force to reckon with. And the new govt will have a hard time if these heads refuse to tow the line, and cannot be removed because of a veto by the EP.
Any attempt to break the impasse would only lead to more tension, and raises the importance of the EP office that is backed up by all the incumbent heads. Yes, this will include the military, police and all uniformed groups. Someone said they will be called upon to remove a rogue govt or a new govt. Possible, likely? In such a situation, the authority of the EP can be called upon to march out the troops. That is the only legitimate source of power left for the ex govt.
And yes, the EP can block any attempt to touch the reserves with all the govt agencies behind him. He is not a lame duck or a straw man in such a situation.
The EP is the fall back position. And he is worth every cent paid to him when such a situation arises. Don’t pray, pray with the LPPL President. He has a big role to play when a crisis demands it. Other than this, his role is primarily ceremonial. Nathan lives that role perfectly, to the letter in the Constitution. And Tony Tan knows it too. He will be an excellent EP in the same mould as Nathan.
The other 3 candidates appeared to be eager beavers, wanting to do a lot of things that the EP was not designed to do. A strong PM can completely ignore him or shut him off. Can an EP order a PM or minister to listen to his rants or to have tea with him? All they need to do is to tell him they are busy. Period.
8/24/2011
30,000 0r 8,000, who is bluffing?
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.
Claiming 8,000 as 30,000 or 30,000 as 8,000 is simply idiotic and unbecoming. Someone’s integrity is at stake.
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)