Population Poll

One day left for you to make your voice heard on this issue. 512 have voted. Keep it coming. This is important.

Thank you.

And don't forget the advertisers : )

Strengthening the Singaporean core

This is one of the major objectives of the White Paper that aimed to have 50% foreigners and 50% Sinkies. What is the percentage of Sinkies in the population today? 3.3m out of 5.3m works out to be 62%. And we used to be more than 70% or 90%.

So, with the dwindling percentage of Sinkies in the whole population, is the White Paper strengthening the Sinkie core or weakening the Sinkie core? And don’t forget the fact that many of the Sinkies are actually new citizens, actually foreigners with very shallow roots here. So, at 50% in 2030, what is the real true blue Sinkie core, 30%?

The preponderant maid/servant mentality

The employment of maids here is becoming a national preoccupation, a sign of affluence, a statement of having arrived. Everyone of any social standing would want to have a maid to tag along wherever they go. The maid/servant concept is now a necessity and the importance of maid/servant in a household is growing in importance. In many cases, the maid/servant has become indispensable and a must have. And the maid/servant knows the importance of their role in the household. Many have assumed the function of the butler and rule the house like their little fiefdoms. And the masters of the households are hapless as they have got too used to the whims and fancies of the maid/servant. They think they cannot do without the maid/servant running the house.

What has now become a new reality is that the maid/servant has usurped the power of the household and started to run the household to their likings, feeding the masters on what they thought or decided would be good for the masters. Some hold the purse strings, sort of, and buy what they wanted and dispense away with what they did not fancy. The masters are comfortable to return to a home as long as the home is kept tidy and in order and dare not ask for more. They just turn a blind eye to the growing power and control of the maid/servant.

Some maid/servants even have the audacity to bring in their friends to the homes. It started stealthily but it is now done in bright daylight. The households are frequented by guests of the maid/servant. They even occupied the guest rooms and would soon be using the master bedroom as well. And when the master protests, the maid/servant insists that their friends were there to help out to look after the house. Without the friends presence, the household will run down and turn into a mess. The master of the household sheepishly accepted the arrangement with little protest.

When will the maid/servant take over the household and drive the master out of the house? As it is, the children of the master have left as the house is either too small or getting undesirable for them to stay anyway.

PAP could have won Punggol East

There were two articles in the Sunday Times by Warren Fernandez and Han Fook Kwang analysing the Punggol East by election. Warren’s comments could be summarised under the following points, The writing was on the wall for the PAP, There’s no winning without a fight, Politics may be local, but all elections are national, Voters want ‘someone like me’, and Politics contrains policies. In these headings he more or less explained why the PAP lost Punggol East. If only the PAP could read his analysis before the by election, it would have won. There are so many enlightening comments and strategies which would help PAP in the by election and may be in the next GE.

Han Fook Kwang’s recommendation was simpler. He suggested that the PAP needed ‘to relook is the type of candidates it fields for elections….Get the right people in its leadership and the right policies will follow.’ What Han Fook Kwang did not say is that the PAP had been recruiting the wrong people that came up with the wrong policies. This is just what I read between the lines.

To me there were many issues facing the PAP then and going forward. The quality of its candidates, some were good, left much to be desire. It was so obvious to the voters but not to the PAP. Even some ministers are doubtful starters in the GE. They were the ones who formulated all the policies that were not only unpopular but seen as against the interests of the citizens. And obviously they did not get it and quickly propounded this great theory of a 6.9m population without highlighting the consequences of such a crowd but only economic growth. And we know what the PAP wants is not what the people want. And trust me, they are going to vote for the White Paper in Parliament with overwhelming majority. And they will proclaim that it was approved in Parliament.

Will a change in the type of candidates work? It is not just because they were elitist, not because they were parachuted down in the last hour, not because they could not connect with the people, I think there are more to it. It is history at works.

White Paper on population in Parliament

The MPs have probably one week to read the White Paper before debating in Parliament. I am sure many are very well prepared to debate this Paper by looking at the report that said 42 MPs will be talking on this issue.

One question that comes to mind is the position of the MPs. Will they be speaking for or against the 6.9m population? And the follow up question, how did they come to their final position? Did they talk to their constituents to seek their views on this crucial issue? How many of the constituents did they speak to in less than one week?

Or maybe they know what their constituents want and simply walk into Parliament to speak on their behalves. Or maybe there is no need to talk to their constituents as they have given them the full mandate as their representatives to say what, being the talented knows all MPs, they think is good for the constituents?

And I am sure they will vote for the interests of their constituents. And I am sure each one will be their own man or woman, to think and speak independently, and to vote independently with their conscience, and of course for the good of their constituents.

The people’s interests are in good hands. Trust me.