Who is the real kingmaker?

When Chok Tong was made the PM, everyone was clear who put him there. No one has any doubt as to who called the shot, who decided who it should be. When Chok Tong became the PM, he started to groom Hsien Loong to be the PM. It took him 20 years to do the grooming.
 
Then one fine day, or one fine evening, Wong Kan Seng invited a few ministers for a makan. And in that meeting, not sure if Chok Tong was invited, Kan Seng suggested Hsien Loong should be the PM. And those present agreed.
 
So, who was the kingmaker then, Chok Tong for grooming Hsien Loong and preparing for the post, or was it Kan Seng? It could be Chok Tong who instructed Kan Seng what to do. If that be the case, Chok Tong was the kingmaker and it did not matter if he was at the makan or not. What is the truth?
 
, Hsien Loong is still looking around for someone to succeed him. Chok Tong said it would be decided by the ministers of the day, just like what Kan Seng did, over a makan among the ministers. Presumably all the ministers were present or maybe some were and some were not. If that be the case, there was no king maker but a group of ministers making the decision, a PM appointed by consensus. This would dismiss the belief that there is a kingmaker and the PM is the man that grooms the next king.
 
What should it be? Got kingmaker or not? And if got, who and who is the new kingmaker today? Was Kan Seng the kingmaker then and is he still the kingmaker today? What is the role of the PM in the whole process? Was Chok Tong the kingmaker in his time as he implied in his grooming of Hsien Loong?
 
It seems so simple and straight forward but really not that straight forward and simple after all. Who knows, maybe Chan Chun Sing would call for a makan like Kan Seng and say let’s decide who should be the PM? Would it be like that?

The most expensive Managing Agent(MA)

Is AHPETC the most expensive MA? Apparently it is since 2014. No one charges anything more than AHPETC after 2014. How many dollars did AHPETC overcharged its residents compare to market rates ie PAP rates?
 
AHPETC and the other town councils are all Managing Agents of housing estates, single constituencies of GRCs. Did someone say overcharging the residents is naughty and unacceptable? Or did someone say what’s wrong with collecting more money? Looking from another angle, to be able to collect more means very clever, and cleverer still to collect more without the people complaining. Or there is a price for quality mah. The more expensive you pay, the better the quality of the service provided tiok boh? Maybe the price difference is for full time and part time MPs.
 
Then why are people complaining and making a big fuzz out of collecting a few dollars more than others?
 
Who is really the most expensive Managing Agent? If we take a step back and look at the bigger picture, is the govt of a country also something like a Managing Agent? If the govt of a country is a MA, the salaries paid to the govt must be the managing agent fee right? Don’t you think we are paying the highest managing agent fee in the whole wide world to the most expensive MA on a pro rata basis or in absolute terms? Can complain or not? Got overcharging or not? Or we are paying out of this world Managing Agent fee for out of this world quality Managing Agent? So the more expensive the better. Are we getting value for money?
 
What do you think?

Tahir – a pleasant and energising story of faith

One does not need to be in the government, in the seat of authority, to want to do good for the country and its citizens. One does not need to be the richest man in the world to start to give away his wealth, to share with the have nots. One needs not be the richest man in Indonesia to do that, to think of country and people. His wealth is reported to be US$2.1b, not very rich among the billionaires in Indonesia, not among the top 5 or top 10 in Singapore. But he is very rich in his heart.

His mission is to do good, not only for the Indonesians but also around the globe. His largest contribution is US$100m in a joint fund with Bill Gates to help the poorest in the world and to eradicate polio. He never forgets he is Indonesian and has set up many charitable organisations to help his people in the areas of education and healthcare.

His main thrust is to see no Indonesians working as maids abroad but as trained professionals in the fields of nursing and sales. To achieve this he has spoken to 5 governors to offer him buildings and training centres and he would provide the teachers, training programmes, food and lodging for the women trainees. This mission is not limited to the 5 governors he spoke to and could expand into other provinces. He is not in the government but what he is doing is what every government would be thinking and be doing, to do good for its people, to uplift their lives.

In God he trusts and he believes that God has provided him with the means and opportunity to give back to his country and people. He is grateful and he spends his time thinking about helping others, to share his wealth with the less privileged. He was not born rich, he made his own money but did not forget that there are many out there that need a little help that his money can make things happened for them. He helps others by giving out his own money. He does not talk about helping others with OPM or taking the money from the people he is helping.

His two Mayapada hospitals provide free medicare to the poor. The cost of a heart surgery is his hospital is less than $8, actually free. No subsidies needed, no govt grants needed.

The world is a much better place when you have rich people feeling rich by sharing their wealth to help others and not by counting the monies in their bank accounts and collecting properties after properties to show that they are rich. Rich people like Tahir have the blessings and approval of God to be what they are and to do what they are doing for the good of other needy people. God bless. Amen.

These are the concluding paragraphs of a Sunday Times article today. ‘He says people should pursue wealth as a means to do some good for the community or mankind, not as an end itself. The biggest and most glorious objective in life is to be a blessing to others, creating their happiness…Otherwise, like the Taiwanese say, you are so poor that money is all you have.’

Nevermind if this is too idealistic and the pragmatics would scorn at such comments when pursuing wealth is all they want to do, to be dignified with all the money they have acquired. See my million dollar cars and my mansions!

PS. I am not a Christian and not pushing for any religion. When believing in God can make a man to do good, that is all that matters. Fearing God is the beginning of wisdom. One can choose not to fear God or any gods.
Tahir is an Indonesia and Singapore PR, a Nantah alumnus.

A degree course for politician wannabes – Lesson 5

This course will deal with a fundamental assumption of what makes a good politician. The first assumption is of course by blood. It is in the DNA. If the papa or mama is politician, then the sons or daughters must be good politicians. Like kingdom rules and kingdom comes. The princes and princesses would become kings or queens, never mind if they are duds due to inbreeding. It is no surprising that many sons and daughters are now in politics and carefully handpicked because of their pedigrees. The fallacy of this assumption is best seen in history books. All the history books recorded that dynasties and monarchies that were succeeded by the children all failed. Those that survived were nominal or for ceremonial purposes when they need not have to prove that they are duds. All they need to do is to talk about saving the environment or saving animals. When they have to prove their worth, it always failed. The other great assumption here is that politicians are damn good in identifying political leaders and can make political leaders. All they need to do is to have a tea session to decide who can be a politician who cannot. Of course they need to prove themselves first in their fields of expertise or are scholars to start with. If they are pedigrees or have blue blood, the tea session is only a formality. The results speak for itself. No further elaborations needed. Another assumption that is related to this tea session is how to qualify to be invited for tea? This assumption is that when one is good in his field or profession, can earn a lot of money, then that one is good to be a political leaders. If one cannot do well in his field, cannot earn a lot of money, academically unsound, not mentality unsound, one is not good. This assumption says a successful professional, be it doctor, lawyer, soldier, academics or govt scholars, or married to one of them, will be a natural to be a political leaders. In reality we know that people are gifted differently, some are good at one thing or something but not good at other things. A good doctor or lawyer or soldier does not mean he will become a good political leader. Anyone thinks this is untrue? Sure, there will be some doctors, lawyers, soldiers or professionals that would turn out to be good political leaders. Librarians, peanut farmers, movie actors, football club managers all can become political leaders. Soldiers too. The fact is that there is no straight forward correlation between one profession and another to become a good political leader. It is a farce to think this is a god given formula. It is worse to think that one can be a good soldier, good lawyer, good doctor, good academic and also a good political leader all rolled into one. It would be a biological fluke. The great philosophers were never great political leaders and great political leaders were never great philosophers. It is a desirable combination for a philosophical king. In reality, maybe one in 500 years or 5000 years. To believe in this assumption often led to lawyers, doctors or professionals who were damn good in their professions and making damn good money and thus demanding for the same money or more to be political leaders but ended up as duds and being over paid for what they are completely clueless as political leaders. A political leader cannot be made, and if made, often turns out to be anything but a political leader. Many great political leaders are self made, by the forces of history, to be there at the time of needs, to do the necessary and to be seen as great leaders. But then again it does not mean that no one can become political leaders, good or bad not an issue. Historically, many were made political leaders for all kinds of reasons and circumstances. Shakespeare said in the Twelve Nights, ‘Some are born great, some achieve greatness, some have greatness thrust upon them.’ Well at least he is talking about greatness be they born, achieve or thrust upon them. Some are anything but great. Think about the assumptions mentioned above and their applications and how effective or ineffective they can be. There is no one model to get a great political leader. And most political leaders that were great were not rich. Those that were rich were often kicked out from the seat of power, in disgrace.

Basic Healthcare Scheme – The straw that breaks the camel’s back

Some Singaporeans woke up yesterday morning and thought they had a pleasant surprise when they read the main media headlines. Medisave Minimum Sum Scheme scrapped. For the self employed oldies, no longer need to top up until they reach 100 years or older.  The good news was proven not to be. It was like the devil and the deep blue sea. In place of the Medisave Minimum Sum, with a current ceiling of $43,500, a new scheme has been introduced, called the Basic Health Scheme with a limit of $49,800. Your money in the Medisave Minimum Sum account would be transferred there. And those below 65 could expect this sum to go up and up over the years. Whatever in your Medisave Minimum Sum would not be safe. You can kiss them goodbye.

This BHS is supposed to be better designed to cater for the oldies’ medical care in old age. It also means that the oldies would not be spared from paying to the Medishield Life Scheme even when they are jobless, without any income and dying. Oh, no worry, the BHS would pay.

When a Govt thinks it is alright to make the oldies pay with their coffin money, their life savings, when they are old and jobless and have no income, the Govt lost its moral right to govern. When they would not spare the oldies and think it is alright to take their last few dollars in the name of looking after them, it shows a callous and ruthless mindset completely devoid of compassion and human decency.

There is no point talking about this anymore. Opposition parties better quickly get their acts together, offer an alternative that does not rob the oldies of their life savings. Fleecing on the old and helpless and jobless is ethically unacceptable for whatever farcical excuses. The opposition parties must come out with a plan to provide free coverage for the oldies, not necessary the whole works to keep them alive, hooked to a machine, or expensive surgery and drugs that would cost a bomb. Just provide basic medical care in Class C wards free for the oldies to pass away in dignity, with minimal pain, and with no fear of money not enough and hoping for charity. Many are wishing a quick death when they have nothing to keep them going. Stop the crap that the oldies want to live forever. Only those with millions in their savings would want that. Those that want to live forever would be to afford anything. No need to worry about them.

Oldies 70 and above are mostly in full retirement, some already retired by their mid 50s when they became unemployable due to the FT scheme. Many would hardly have anything left to live by. Many would be dependent on their little savings or children to take care of them. Spare them from the burden of paying medical insurance premium and to live in peace, to be respected and honoured as senior citizens, not to be troubled by having to find money to pay medical insurance.

This is the minimum expected from a caring and people centric govt. This is expected of political leaders that rule with a heart, not those with bad hearts, not mechanical hearts that cannot feel. Vote for any party that would look after the old and helpless, not parties that would want to rob them of their coffin money when they are old and feeble and money no enough.

This is the last straw. It reveals the kind of outrageous values and thinking in sick heads. When they say they got good hearts, don’t believe them. Very likely mechanical hearts or transplants from animals or clones.