Roy Ngerng is not alone

The defamation suit against Roy Ngerng by Hsien Loong is not a case of Hsien Loong versus Roy Ngerng. It has taken on a national character. When it started it was like Goliath going to thump down David. And it was a non event as the ending was as good as history.
 
No one could envisage the outcry and ground swell in support of Roy Ngerng. The outpouring of support for Roy in the social media is only a tip of the iceberg. Many are opening up their Ovaltine tins and counting how much they have to donate to Roy’s legal fee. Some volunteered to donate their CPF savings to Roy. Some are calling for a public donation in the event of an expensive legal tussle in court.
 
This event is turning into the masses, comprising the CPF members affected on one side, and Hsien Loong on the other. Hsien Loong is looking like taking on the CPF members instead of Roy alone. The rallying cry in support of Roy is getting louder. There could be a bigger turnout in Hong Lim on 7 June than expected.
 
The Hong Lim Rally on CPF could be an indication of how strong is the ground and how strong the support for Roy. And there are many silent supporters not saying anything but fully behind Roy and waiting to donate money to Roy’s cause.
 
Roy is turning into a rallying point in this CPF saga. The people, and there are at least two million CPF holders, could be taking sides with Roy and turning this defamation lawsuit into a Battle Royale between the govt and the people. The event is just beginning to unfold and the trophy at stake is the CPF money.
 
Would this molehill turn into a mountain of grievances and an exploding volcano? Or would Hsien Loong take his winnings and walk away to close the chapter?
 
Fish could be singing in background. ‘Hear the people sing, singing the song of angry men….’

Kopi Level - Green

Chuan Jin – CPF is your money

It is good that Chuan Jin came out to try to clarify the issues of CPF money and why the Govt is devising all the schemes to help the CPF members. I am wondering how many people buy his logic and explanations and are satisfied by what Chuan Jin said, or is Chuan Jin thinking that he has done his job in clarifying the misconceptions or wrong perceptions by the CPF members.
 
There are two key principles involved in the CPF saving scheme. One is that the CPF savings are the people’s money, not the Govt’s money. Chuan Jin has clarified this point, that the money is the people’s money. So, would the Govt still think it can meddle with the people’s money as it deems fit, as if the money belongs to the Govt? On what moral ground does the Govt think would justify its actions? The people are stupid or would throw away their money in Batam? Is this a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the Govt to keep the people’s money from the people? The people cannot manage their money? The same logic applies to the people in Govt, even if they have hundreds of millions when they retired, can they handle their money and not squander it away?
 
The second point is about retirement. CPF savings should be returned to the owners when they retired. When retirement age was 55, the money was returned at 55. Now because people live longer, work longer and retire later, the retirement age has been raised, to 60, 62, 65 and so on. Why is it that not all the money was returned to the people when they retired?
 
The logic of people living longer is not a new phenomenon relative to their retirement age. When people were retiring at 55, many lived till their 70s or 80s or 90s. The money was returned and they had to manage them and their lives. Some would do it better some would not. No one was arrogant enough to play God, to assume the role of God, to decide to arbitrarily hold on to the people’s money then.
 
The only difference maybe the people in Govt then did not think they were Gods or immortals or super beans that were smarter than the masses. Today they are different, they know best and arrogated themselves as demigods, even knowing how long a person would live, and how stupid and irresponsible the masses are in the handling of their money.
 
Remember the bell curve. This is applicable in nearly all situations. Today, there will still be people who would be stupid or through bad luck or bad decisions, lose their life savings before they die. Today, even among the immortals and demigods, there will also be some who would be stupid and lose all their millions before they die. What is the difference? There is no exception in the bell curve.
 
Back to the retirement age. This is now used, together with longer lifespan, to prolong keeping the people’s money in the CPF. So, if the retirement age is 80 or 90 or 100, the people can only take back their CPF at these ages? Oh, technically the people can still take back their CPF at 55, this has not changed except for this thing called the Minimum Sum. And do not forget there is another Minimum Sum that many would not get to touch, the Medisave Minimum Sum.
 
The Minimum Sums have changed the whole concept of CPF and the right of the people to their money. So, did Chuan Jin clarify what the CPF is all about and why the Govt has the right to meddle with the people’s life savings to the satisfaction of the people? Does Chuan Jin and the Govt really believe that the CPF money is the people’s money or otherwise? If it is the people’s money, what right does the Govt has to keep the money from the people in the Minimum Sums?
 
Did Chuan Jin address the people’s problems and concerns with their life savings?

Kopi Level - Yellow

Singaporeans First Party

In the crowded political scene of opposition parties, the emergence of another new political party would definitely raised eyebrows. Any political watcher would have a lot of things to say, of doubts and doubts about the doubts they have created over such a party. I could have written another ten pages or articles to create a veil of uncertainties and smokescreens on this new party. I choose to look at it from its relevance to the political situation existing now.
 
Singapore is facing several very serious political changes that could turn into major political crises in the future if allowed to go unchecked. The most crucial change that Singaporeans are facing, I mean Singaporeans, no, I mean true blue Singaporeans, not the instant trees, and not the locals, is their decimation and eventual existence as an absolute minority in the country their forefathers have fought and worked so hard for, a legacy that would not be theirs to inherit.
 
What am I saying, true blue Singaporeans, ie, born and bred here Singaporeans are already an absolute minority today! This is a part of the statistics that is best left unsaid. What is worst is the fate of these true blue Singaporeans, their economical and social well beings. Are they getting a fair share, a bigger share of their inheritance? No? What inheritance? This is just an island and anyone who claims to be more meritocratic, who claims to be cleverer, should take over this island. It does not belong to true blue Singaporeans. It belongs to the people of the world!???
 
The children of the first wife is now being treated worse than the children of the mistresses, worse than the children of the stepmothers, worse than the children of unknown mothers, children of wild oats. And these children that have invaded their home, oops, not invaded but invited to the home, are bullying and discriminating the children of the legitimate first wife. Should the children of the first wife accept their fate, to be run down, to be ousted and booted out from their home? The newcomers and traitors are telling Singaporeans to get out if they cannot stand the heat.
 
Is there anyone championing the cause and the interests of the children of the first wife, the true blue Singaporeans? This is where Singaporeans First Party comes in. There is no political party in the island today that is standing up to fight and defend the rights and interests of Singaporeans as their main objective. They are all intoxicated by the silly mantra of meritocracy regardless of nationality. Or is it meritocrazy?
 
I like the ideology of the Singaporeans First Party spelt out in its manifesto. For the first time, a political party is using a loud hailer to speak for the interests of true blue Singaporeans, to fight for the interests of true blue Singaporeans without having to feel ashamed of it. The interests of true blue Singaporeans have been eroded over the years and must be stopped before it is too late.
 
I hope no one is going to stand up and accuse the Singaporeans First Party as xenophobic, as anti foreigners. And this Party is aware of this trick and has clarified that it is not xenophobic. Yes, being pro Singaporeans is not xenophobic. Only traitors or anti Singaporeans would say such a thing, to denounce Singaporeans for wanting to protect the interests of Singaporeans.
 
I wish this party well and to live up to its manifesto as a pro Singaporeans party. I wish all the other Singaporean political parties would take the cue from this Party to sing the same song. Singapore is for Singaporeans First. And I hope this Party would be able to work closely with the other parties to put up a good fight for the good of Singaporeans.
The Singaporeans First Party has its work cut out for it. It has a very crucial task ahead, to protect and serve the interests of Singaporeans first, not locals, not foreigners first.

Kopi Level - Red

Solidarity of opposition parties

Met Tan Jee Say yesterday and he confirmed that he was setting up a new political party. All the people present received this piece of news with mixed feelings. How is this going to help the cause of the opposition parties to unseed the ruling party, or at least to present a strong united front and to carve up more seats and GRCs for the opposition? The very thought of more opposition parties being formed always elicit the fear of vote splitting and weakening the opposition’s position.

Jee Say was quick to allay the fears of more splits and dilution of votes. He would not be a spoiler to create confusion and three corner fights. He will work closely with the other opposition parties in a united front, or at least would not undermine their common cause. We would have to see what really happens when the GE is announced. And there are always the wise voters to count on like in the Punggol East by election when the fight was a clear opposition versus the PAP and the irrelevant opposition parties would be abandoned by the single minded voters.

The fact that Jee Say attended the NSP fund raising dinner could be seen as a positive sign that he was willing to play ball and be a team player. And he was not the only one present. The WP, SDP, SPP and PKMS were also there with their top leaders showing support and unity in the opposition camp. For Low Thia Khiang, Sylvia Lim and Gerald Giam to attend the function was a good way to dispel the impression that the WP is aloft and would want to go it alone, ignoring the other opposition parties as inconsequential. For the opposition leaders to be seating together in the same table is a promising start, that at least they are willing to talk, to eat and drink together and be friends.

Opposition solidarity is the key to fight a successful battle in the next GE. If the opposition parties are unable to come together, or at least not to split and fight among themselves, the task to unseat the incumbent party would be that much harder. There are still many things that can happen as we close in on D Day, either this year or 2015. Would it be a serious battle with serious contenders, or would it be another circus with jokers popping up everywhere and in the most undesirable places to create more confusion? Let’s wait and see.

Kopi Level - Yellow

A time to repent

Many people go to church on Sunday. Some go to seek comfort some to confess and some to repent. The recent uproar on the development of the CPF schemes particularly on the retention of the people’s life time savings is being felt the wrong way by many affected CPF members. Many in the social media are speaking out on something they know isn’t right. And a young man, Roy Ngerng, is now in hot soup for stating his case too strong and rubbing Hsien Loong the wrong way.

The Govt has been making a lot of changes to the CPF schemes on the ground that they are the elected representatives of the people, the lawmakers and thus bestowed to the to make whatever changes they deemed necessary, all legally under the law. No MPs or Ministers have spoken firmly against the changes, presumably agreeing that there is nothing wrong with the changes. No one questions the legality of it all, assuming that everything done is legal as long as the Govt says so, absolutely legal.

From the aspects of ethics and morality, from the angle of equity and fairness, from the point of social justice, is there no wrong about keeping the people’s life time savings away from them and deciding what to do with them without their consent and changing the date of withdrawal, with some in the Medisave Minimum Sums that may not be withdrawal at all unless the member is seriously ill or hospitalised. Otherwise the money would go to his beneficiary without him enjoying it after saving it for a lifetime.

The silence or lack of objection by the Ministers and MPs is as good as all agrees to the changes, all supports the changes and all does not see anything wrong with all the changes. Many have voted to the changes, but many changes were not even discussed or addressed in Parliament. Whether the Ministers and MPs voted in support of the changes in the CPF Schemes or simply abstained, without saying no to the changes when they can, they are all in it, all in support of the changes, tacitly, reluctantly, grudgingly or willingly.

I am just wondering if any Minister or MP has any misgivings about the changes to the CPF Schemes. Do their conscience prick them when the people are kept away from withdrawing their savings on reaching the age of 55 and henceforth a higher age to be introduced over the years? Nothing wrong about it, nothing wrong with the meddling of the people’s lifetime savings against their wishes, without their consent? In all fairness and with one hand touching the heart, does anyone of them think they have the right to mess around with other people’s money, the money that people saved over a lifetime, to act as if they are the guardian angels vested with the power to do as they want, inventing more and more schemes while the people getting angrier and angrier?

Can these people sleep well? Or can these people say they have nothing to do with the changes, that they too did not agree with the changes? Can they be excused or be guilt free when they are the elected people’s representatives and could do something about it but did nothing? All 87 MPs and Ministers are saying yes to all the schemes or not saying no while they people’s money slips further and further from their fingers. It is perfectly ok to mess around with other people's life savings.

Kopi Level - Yellow