myth 35

'...civil service has become politicised and is "subordinated and even subservient to the political leadership"' I quoted the above from the Today paper's article on Ngiam Tong Dow. It then quoted Simon Tay saying that 'Ngiam's recollections suggest that such comments "go too far"'. Ngaim did not say that it is a myth or that it is the truth. He just said 'go too far'. If the comments did not go too far, maybe could be true. In this case, by going too far, it is a myth. The mandarin has spoken.

going down the malaysian road

We have many things in common with the Malaysians. We are also engaged in many developmental projects, mega projects, some private initiatives and some govt initiatives. All done either to inject funds and vitality to the economy or to make profits for the project owners. But there are subtle differences between the Singaporean way and the Malaysian way. Where the project funds come from, who benefitted, who get the share of the profits and who pay for the profits. There is also another key difference in the conceptual stage. Singaporean projects were normally conceived when there is a need with profits coming in later. In the case of Malaysians, the project was conceived from the profit first basis and generating the needs later. So we have the crooked bridge, a classic example of a project where the need was not there but build up to justify for it, and with how much money can be made as the main reason. Who eventually pays for the project and profit are secondary. Would Singapore go down this road, conceiving of a project because there is money to be made? And get the private sector to pay for all the costs and charge the public for it? I have in mind the underground road system. The Malaysians are expert and single minded in building roads and bridges and railway lines to collect tolls. Not that we are not collecting tolls. The tolls we are collecting are much bigger in scale. But these are schemes that grow out of a necessity, a need. Suddenly the road situation got bad, so the easiest way to kill two birds with one stone is to make the motorists pay and relieve congestion. We have never think of collecting toll as the primary goal, the raison d'tre for building roads. This is the Malaysian way of making money. Not forgetting we are already collecting in the billions from ARF, PARF, road tax, COEs, ERPs, ALS. Aren't these enough to pay for the construction of roads? Aren't the collection of all these fees meant for this purpose? Now where have all these monies gone to that we need to think of collecting tolls as the main reason for the building of roads?

more than 4 million smiles!

Mr Brown has done it. Got to give him a medal. When the IMF officials are here in September, they will all be having a big smile on their faces after reading Mr Brown's blog.

myth 34

'Journalists are supposed to write and champion issues' So I thought. And I think they have been doing that for a long time, everywhere. Maybe a little selective at times. But they are writing about issues. Now am I wrong? Quote from K BHAVANI's letter: "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues.." This is the view from the Press Secretary to the Minister of MICA. Are we going to see a different newspaper from today? No more championing of issues? What are the journalists going to write now? Bak Cho Mee? Even then cannot complain that the Bak Cho Mee is no good or not up to standard. If not happy and want to complain, must be constructive and come up with alternatives and solutions. (Bak Cho Mee Version 1.1)

myth 33

'Political power passes from father to son' This has been a very popular myth that has been circulating in the kopitiams. And it is a myth that needs to be debunked after having been around for so long. Actually saying it is easier than done as many people, no matter how logical is the argument, will still want to believe in this myth. LKY passed the baton to Chok Tong. Who said he passed it to the son? And Chok Tong passed it to Hsien Loong. Who said Hsien Loong received it from the father? The facts are there but people just stubbornly refused to accept it as it is. Run it through a computer and the answer is absolute. Talking about the human mind. We believe what we want to believe. The next point related to this myth is the assumption that because it is father to son, so the son is not worthy but got into the position by patronage. Even this cannot hold any water. Who in the cabinet can stand shoulder to shoulder to Hsien Loong? Don't compare him with LKY. That is not a fair comparison. No one can stand shoulder to shoulder with him. Oh, yes, the only person that stood taller than Hsien Loong is Chok Tong, physically. Look at the total package, Hsien Loong still stands a head above Chok Tong, with all due respect to him. Both first class honours. This is a comparison of giants. Anyone with a second upper or lesser, please stand aside. And Hsien Loong's is a double first from Cambridge, the top university in Britain. And his military record, a general and a hero who has saved lives. This one has no comparison. Then there are the additional plus factors. Who else could have the rare opportunities of having two brilliant parents to rub shoulders with and share the genes? Who else has a wife that is equal to none, academically and in achievements? All these are added assets that only Hsien Loong has. So the son is not as good as the father? Maybe not now, but the future is there for him to create. Even if he cannot outshine the father, it is no shame as not many people worldwide can outshine him. And the realities. Since Hsien Loong took over the rein, the economy has been up and up. And unemployment is down and down. And there are so much money to give to the people. Who can do that? So there goes the myth.