Obsolescence of citizenship

I have written quite a number of articles calling for more jobs and recognition for being Singaporeans and being citizens of this island we called home. This, to me, is a place that our forefathers have turned around, from a British colony and a not so well developed country of the Third World to the Jewel of Southeast Asia. Thought we should be proud of what have been done by our forefathers and should claim credit for it.

Looks like I am just a voice in the wilderness and not many people care two hoots what was done in the past. The honour and the people that needed to be rewarded are the new foreign talents, the foreign workers and nothing to do with Singaporeans, the daft and lazy and untalented and undeserving citizens should just shift out and be replaced.

Many are getting sick of the message that I thought Singaporeans should be thinking and talking about for their own well being and the well being of their future generations. The pathetic turnout at Hong Lim is a point to ponder. And the many annoying views against the protection of Singaporeans and their jobs have appeared more and more frequently in my blog and also elsewhere in the social media and the main media.

Singapore is a place for the talented regardless of nationalities. All the good and top jobs must go to the most talented and deserving. I spent one whole night meditating over this call and have been enlightened by the power of the logic and reasoning. Yes, Singapore and the citizens would be nothing if we are narrow minded, trapped by our little pride and nationalistic fervour, to want to reserve the good and top jobs for not so talented Singaporeans. For the survival of Singapore, we should allow the talents of the world to come in and take over the top jobs in the island to drive the economic growth for the good of the future of the island.

I have finally come around with my rustic, naive and archaic thinking that we should be thinking for the good of Singaporeans. No, that is a bad idea, a regressive idea. The lesser talented and daft have no place for the future, citizens or no citizens. The future is for the best talented.

Singapore is the city of the future for the talents of the world. Imagine the kind of city Singapore will be if all the top talents are here and all the dafts are departed for their own good. It will truly live up to the expectation of what a futuristic and fantasy utopia of the rich and most well endowed human beans the world ever produced.

To move into this direction, let’s do away with citizenship. The new term to replace citizenship can be locals or residents. These are people specially qualified by their talents to live here. The rest will be temporary workers, the no talents. The first exercise will be to select the Singapore citizens and PRs and sort them out, and divide them along this line. The non locals or non residents, ex Singaporeans included, can still be rewarded to become locals or residents, if they can prove themselves over the years, that they are deserving talents.

No job in the country is reserved for citizens, as there will be no such category left. Taxi drivers will also lose their reserve occupation to drive taxis. At the top, all govt posts, including President, PM and Ministers will also be open to all locals and residents. In this way only the very best in the world can take over these positions. No half baked citizens can aspire or conspire to keep these jobs to themselves. And there will be free mobility of talents in and out of the island, based on nothing but their talents or no talents.

Singapore will be the best place to live in, for the best talented. The lesser talented and not so talented, please shift out.

Are you talented enough to be a local or resident? Good luck to you.

Sun Tzu’s Art of War in practice

The continuing episode of the tussle over the AIM saga has taken a new twist with the WP’s award of the TCMS contract to FM Solutions and Services(FMSS) taking the spotlight. The AIM saga saw the PAP on the defensive, warding blows all over.

The picture has changed with the FMSS involvement and the WP is now on the defensive. Teo Ho Pin has suggested something amiss amounting to impropriety. The WP, represented by Sylvia Lim, has stood its ground and challenged Teo Ho Pin to report the case to CPIB if they think it is necessary. The ball is now in the court of the PAP, to go to the CPIB or not got go. Going to the CPIB is a serious thing and WP will be very busy invited for tea and its award of the contract to FMSS be put under the microscope. Not going to the CPIB is an admission that what he said has no basis. Very likely it will go to CPIB I think.

Would WP then counter the move with a report to CPIB on the AIM saga, if they can find any ground to do so, and open another front? This is political warfare with attacks and counteroffensive, evasions, misleading the enemies, diversions, all lumped into the battle field.

How would this war go forward and how long will it take to end the war? Will there be a victor or will both parties end up as collateral damages? This is going to be a massive exercise involving a lot of manhours and resources and the skills of military strategists and snoops to dig out more information as cannon fodder. The beneficiary of this contest will be truth, transparency and accountability, hopefully.

Politicians will be made more aware of the spotlight that could fall on them on what they are doing and the explanations they have to provide to appease public scrutiny. This is something like washing dirty linen in the open. This is a new expectation, a new political reality.

Myth 1 and Myth2 Polls

The two polls on the top right have expired and the numbers shown are not amusing. In fact the numbers are jumping up and down daily. My earlier polls received about 600 votes. These two could barely get 20 votes each. Yesterday I saw one showing 50 votes. Of course the real numbers were much higher. The first poll reached about 60 but crashed down to below 20 a few days latter and had been at that level since then. The second poll suffered the same fate.

I do not believe that Blogger offered a poll facility that is flawed or unreliable. But the fact is that the Poll facility is not showing the real data and it is quite pointless to use it any more.

Blogger.com/, if you are reading this, you need to rectify this as it reflects badly on Blogger itself. Until this error is corrected I shall refrain from using the Poll again.

The issue raised as to whether Singapore is providing more good and high value jobs to foreigners or the other way round is quite obvious to some. Look at the few hundred PMETs here is enough to tell a picture. These foreigners must be getting a good deal here, some may not even get a job if not of Singapore, or else they would not be here, they would have scooted. And there are many CEO jobs given to foreigners and paying millions, several millions that could have gone to able Singaporeans. How many such jobs were created by the foreigners here for Singaporeans? Or how many thousand PMET jobs, paying good salaries, have the foreigners created for Singaporeans?

This is a piece of statistics that is not available yet. This issue should be discussed to confirm that bringing in the foreigners and foreign companies really contributed to more and better jobs for Singaporeans and not the other way. And those foreign companies that are not contributing anything of good value to Singaporeans is best to tell them to find their cheap source of labour elsewhere. There is no value for their presence here. And the Govt should consider keep all the top jobs for Singaporeans wherever possible unless it is a case of no choice, where the business will turn turtle without the foreign talent. In most cases the difference made is marginable and not earth shaking and Singaporeans should be the preferred candidates especially in Govt institutions and GLCs. We don’t owe the foreigners to give them high paying jobs.

As Hsien Loong pointed out, there is a dearth of Singaporeans in the banking and finance industry at the senior leader, the specialists and leaders. This is not good for the country.

Depoliticisation is the way

The issue of politics and depolitics has again taken the spotlight in Parliament. For obvious reasons, common sense, chicken sense, for the interests of the people, continuity, in the name of administrative efficiency, many govt institutions must be depoliticized. Tiok boh? Agree or not? The judiciary, uniformed groups and the civil service are depoliticized for good reasons. They are the pillars of the non political govt, the state institutions, to provide continuity and the same level or service and dedication to the country and people irrespective of whichever political party took office.

Many people would sneer at such a comment. Understandable. The level or degree of politicization of state institutions is apparent and many would not want to say too much about the realities on the ground. It is a very subjective thing. But many concerned citizens, righteous citizens, must know that the lesser these institutions are politicized the better for the people and country. Anyone thinks or believes otherwise, that the more politicized these institutions are, the better for country and people? Admittedly it is not possible to be completely neutral from the political realities of the day.

And more institutions are best depoliticized to maintain neutrality, objectivity and continuity as they are meant to continue to exist and to serve the people regardless of a change of govt. Do I feel talking about this issue?

Of course politicians will want to politicize as many public institutions as possible for the good of people and country, and not for their own vested interests. And they will speak with a hand over their hearts that they are speaking with all honesty, that they are telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And if they are God fearing, they will even swear to their God that they are saying with full convictions, and their conscience are clear. Believe me at your own risk.

What are the obvious institutions that should be depoliticized or politicized for the good of people and country? Dunno leh! I think even this simple obvious state of things would not get an honest answer from honest and righteous people. They say politics is politics. Now what does that mean?

Reposting of my articles at your own risk

Several blogs and websites have written to me for permission to repost my articles and I have generously consented to their requests. While the contents of my articles are often provocative in nature, they are never intent to be personal to attack anyone personally. I have tried to be very careful in what I write to prevent people from accusing me of any personal wrongdoings against them. Thus in general I intentionally avoid mentioning names or post photographs of people and only deal with issues and policies or a discussion on a subject matter.

Should I have offended anyone unintentionally, as  I mentioned in my disclaimer, I will willingly apologise and remove the offending post. Throughout my almost 10 years of writing this blog, my intention has been very clear and I have avoided offending anyone directly or intentionally. There was an instance though that an article I posted attracted some very strong comments. I received a legal letter to have the article removed, and I did duly. The matter was then dealt with between the offended party and the offender who made the nasty comments.

Since then most of the bloggers here have refrained themselves from personal attacks and any infringement have been minor. My blog is for discussion and for entertaining read, not to pick a fight with anyone or to defame anyone.

The tricky thing is that when my articles are reposted, some blogs or websites may add in things that are beyond my control, like changing the titles or adding pictures or photographs of people. These additions, alterations or changes could change the nature of my articles and may become offensive to some people.

I will like to remind those blogs or websites not to make these additions or changes that may lead to unnecessary complications and offending people directly. And if they do so, I will not want to be held responsible for their actions which could be totally different and contrary to the intent of my articles. I do not give permission to alter, add or make changes to my articles when reposted.

Thank you for your understanding.

Redbean