The debate I am waiting for

If there is a debate that could ignite Parliament and bring it alive, it must be Vivian Balakrishnan versus Lim Swee Say. And the topic, Speak Good English. And allow them to bring in a few co debaters, 3 for each side like all debates were. Vivian’s choice would be quite easy to guess, Shanmugam, Mah Bow Tan, a great debater in his heyday, and perhaps LKY or Hsien Loong. He would be spoilt for choices I am sure. Now who would be on the side of Swee Say? Dum, dum dum….Ok, for this matter, we should break parliamentary protocol and allow Swee Say to bring in the bestest from the island. I am hearing clapping sound and good, good, in the streets. If this is can do, the first obvious choice would be ex Miss Singapore Ris Low. Clap, clap, clap. She is hot favourite to spiak good Singlish. Two more, just two more. Oh dear, Swee Say will be spoilt for choices too. Let me just throw up a few good potential contestants. How about Phua Chu Kang aka Gurmit Singh, or his wife Rosie aka Irene Ang? Mark Lee or Jack Neo may do quite well too. But if he prefers betterer candidates, he could even invite some FTs to join his side too. Then we can have a Special Edition of In Parliament, 2 hours long, and no one would complain it is too long. And it will also be full house in Parliament, including the public gallery. MediaCorp can air in both Channel 5 and 8. Guarantee all Singaporeans sure stay home to watch one. Just kidding. KNN can take a little joke or not?

Singaporeans unappreciative of Vivian

Scouting around cyberspace, the immediate impression is that many Singaporeans are angry, very angry, with Vivian for the way YOG had turned out. No one cares how well the game was managed and how perfectly were the opening and closing ceremonies that showed to the world how efficient we were as a people. We could managed and organised big time world events. And the YOG was there to prove our worth. One particular vibe about Vivian is the blown budget by some 300%. The final bill for the game came to $387m. And Singaporeans were unhappy. Singaporeans should look at the whole thing in proper perspective. Vivian was actually very prudent and careful about public money and would not anyhow give them away, even for $10. That is his reputation. He emphasised his thrifty management style in Parliament. According to Vivian, the blown budget was his fault. Yes, but not because he was careless in managing the money. It was the reversed. He constantly and repeatedly reminded the Organising Committee of the YOG to be careful about the money spent. It was OPM after all. And he squeezed the budget to keep it small and that no one dared to over spent. And his conscientiousness in controlling the expenditure turned out to be his undoing. Under his guidance, the Organising Committee became too careful and tried their best to present as small a budget as possible. They tried to cut corners, lower the quality of the things needed for the game. I think the food for the volunteers was a good example. If only the Committee had been forthwith and direct and presented a reasonable budget that was closer to the real thing! If only Vivian would have been more generous and let them quote and spend whatever the Committee wanted! Then the original budget presented could even be $500m. And Vivian could then tell them to cut cost, and the final bill, $387m. It would be a different story. He could even claimed credit for saving more than $100m! Or a discount or a subsidy or whatever you want to call it. And everyone will praise him instead of blaming him. His fault now lies in his thriftiness and honesty in working with the truth. Only if he would have followed the unscrupulous business or commercial gimmicks of generous discounts after jacking up the prices, things would have been different. The people must relook at the whole issue and say a big thank you to Vivian for a job well done. And if he had not been thrifty, the bill could be $500m. Singaporeans must be more understanding and appreciative. It is not an easy job to start with. _________________

Another day of disappointment

I was watching In Parliament last night, looking for gems again. It was another disappointing session. After sitting through the 10 minutes of airing on Channel 5 I could not remember anything worth noting. All I could recall was a few familiar faces like Halimah, Zaqy, Ho Geok Choo and Hawazi. Oh, I remember the camera zoomed in on a handful of faces in the back bench. To be exact, I remember 3 faces, De Souza, Pauline and Sylvia. And the camera kept coming back to Pauline as if the room was too crowded and it was being blocked from taking other faces. I was hoping that it could pan the whole Parliament room to show all the faces but no. Viewers watching In Parliament could go off with the impression that our Parliament had not more than 10 MPs. Of course there were 84 of them out there. This morning's ST reported that Mah Bow Tan was there and so was Lee Bee Wah. She dispelled the impression that Parliament was having a sleepy session. It was indeed very busy. This is what she said. 'Sometimes we are not called on even though we put up our hands. I would like to see more time devoted to hot topics in particular, so that the issue can be thoroughly debated.' That I agree, will be a good change instead of limiting debating time and the session ended with a minister making his prepared speech and followed by a few prepared questions from the MPs. To give justice to Parliament sitting, MediaCorp should devote more time to it rather than the 10 minutes accorded, same same like Talking Point. Even Blog TV has longer air time than the highest body meeting in the country. It would give an opportunity for the people to share some of the wisdom from the best talents in the country, anytime betterer than Blog TV.

Shhhhh…planning is a bad word

Don’t ever mention the word ‘planning’ in the public. To plan ahead, be proactive, and prepare for problems before they arise! Saying this word is going to result in many red faces. Just whisper it in private if you want, and have a good laugh at it. A little bird said that to me. I think it makes a lot of sense. The word may be raised to the same status as ‘boomz’. Or it may even become taboo.

The Ridiculous Nature of Thick Heads

Up till today, they are still using the same stupid reasons to explain the fiasco in public housing. There must be demand before HDB will build more flats. What about the demand of those who could not afford and could not apply, no demand by default of inability? And what about those that were kicked out of the HDB queue because their incomes are deemed too high? HDB will build flats to cater for the lower income first. Those who earn above HDB’s arbitrary income ceiling cannot apply for HDB flats as they will compete with the lower income and push up demand and prices! How silly. But they cannot see the silliness of this argument. The higher income group can only apply for the bigger and more expensive flats. So they are not competing with the lower income group for smaller flats. So what is the problem? What is the problem? The whole problem is NOT building enough to meet the demand. That is the stupid problem. And how silly of it when the flats are sold for huge profits? Hey jokers, you are not doing charity and selling flats at a loss! Can you get it? It is profit and profit and more profit. The difference is how much profit. So what is your problem in building more flats to meet the needs of all citizens irrespective of their income? Is it that citizens buying HDB flats will deflate the prices of private properties and the coffers of private developers, and the rich/speculators who have bought private properties and waiting to dump to these suckers that have no where to turn to? How thick can they get? They are still thinking that they are selling HDB flats at a loss and so must not build more than necessary.