The politics of AHPETC

AHPETC has been dragged into court not because a crime has been committed but over procedural matters and unacceptable management practices. And the court seems to be questioning itself why they are involved in this case. Shouldn’t it be a matter that the Minister of National Development could deal with it summarily?

The ding dongs in the courts of law mean that the judges would be kept very busy trying to judge something that they are not sure if they should be judging. It means the courts time would be taken up instead of allowing other criminal cases to be heard. It also means that the AHPETC would have to engage lawyers for its defence and to spend money on it. Would the money come from the WP or AHPETC? And the WP politicians involved would be kept busy trying to absolve themselves from blame.

The same question I would like to put forth, why are politicians elected to run town councils and be directly responsible for the administrative matters of a town council? Shouldn’t this be the jobs of full time civil servants or statutory boards? Politicians are the least appropriate to run a permanent organization that is supposed to run continuously no matter which political party is in power. The daily operating function of a town council is an administrative function, not a political function or responsibility.

Why burden politicians to be the administrator of a statutory organization running essential services? And why compromise the proper and smooth functioning of town councils and the efficiency of running an estate with politicians and depriving them from performing their roles as law maker? Running town councils should not be subject to the unpredictability of the election processes. There must be continuity and permanence of tenure and the expertise and dedication of permanent staff.

Politicians should be free from the responsibility of running a town council. It is not what they are supposed to do. It is not what they are elected to do. Their primary duty is law making and making sure all the service providers provide decent and efficient service to the people in their respective constituency. Their role should be like the Transport Minister overseeing the functions and operations of the train and bus services or other ministers overseeing other essential services. If the Ministers are not satisfied, they can express their unhappiness and demand the operators to buck up without themselves being asked to buck up and be nailed.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki – Japan’s just desert

As the Japanese grief over the fate of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the lives lost when two Atom bombs fell on the two cities, many are still wondering whether the events to commemorate the dead and destruction of the two cities meant anything to the Japanese?

Kwok Kian Woon wrote a piece in the ST on 6 Aug titled, ‘A letter to Japanese friends on Hiroshima Day’ in the most friendly way possible to share Japan’s grief and politely asked the Japanese about the same question I asked above. Kwok Kian Woon quoted Kuo Pao Kun saying, ‘I think that of all peoples the Japanese have in their living memory the most profound understanding of the war because the Japanese were at the same time a very cruel aggressor and a victim of the cruelest experience of war….What is there in the Japanese psyche, what is there in the Japanese culture, that stops a people capable of deep, profound thinking coming out strongly as a people, not just a few individuals but as a people, to reflect openly and deeply about the war?

What did Kuo Pao Kun and Kwok Kian Woon wanted the Japanese to reflect about? The pain and destruction from Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not insignificant. But compared to the pain and suffering wrought by the Japanese on the millions of Asians from Korea, China in the North all the way down to South East Asia, to Indonesia, the Philippines and Burma, what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chicken feat. The pain and suffering and the lost of lives and destruction brought about by the invading barbaric forces of the Imperial Japanese Army were abominable. Can Japan and the Japanese people understand that? Can Japan and the Japanese people understand the thousands of Americans that were bombed and killed in Pearl Harbour without knowing what hit them? Can the Japanese understand the hundreds of thousands of American and Allies soldiers that died and maimed to fight them and to drive them back to the Japanese shores, all because Japan started an invasion to conquer and colonise other people?

Despite the polite words of Kwok Kian Woon and Kuo Pao Kun, the Japanese did not understand and did not learn anything about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan under Abe and his militant cabinet is remilitarizing to be the same militant Japanese of pre defeated Japan. They are legitimizing themselves to go to war again. They want the right to go to war, to fight, destroy and kill again. They have burnt their pacifist constitution.

The Japanese did not learn anything from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They do not mind Hiroshima and Nagasaki to be repeated again. Or they do understand what Hiroshima and Nagasaki meant and want to do another Hiroshima and Nagasaki on others, to avenge their defeat and their pain and suffering.

Let me quote Kuo Pao Kun again, ‘What is there in the Japanese psyche, what is there in the Japanese culture, that stops a people capable of deep, profound thinking coming out strongly as a people,….’ What is there for the Japanese people to know that they should not try or attempt to repeat what they did to the rest of Asia and to the Americans, and to live in peace instead of harbouring the ambition to go to war again, as a war mongering nation?

Japan must be warned not to allow Hiroshima and Nagasaki to happen again. They brought it upon themselves. Do they want history to repeat itself by flexing its military might and cherishing for war again?

GE2015 – The Ace in PAP’s deck

I wrote about Hsien Loong having a hand without an ace to play in this GE recently. Knowing PAP’s ingenuity and creativity to come up with surprises, they will find an ace somewhere. Yes, Hsien Loong does not have an ace in hand. Would he find an ace from the tea party interviews? So far, from those faces that have been paraded, the would be’s and could be’s, there is nothing unusual, the same DNA from the military and civil service. There could be a couple of grassroot leaders showing up, but nothing flattering, anything but an ace?

We may have to wait until the whole new cohort is announced to have a taste of what’s cooking. Would there be the likes of Prof Paul Tambyah of the SDP? Or would there be a Nicole Seah to make the difference and cause a big sensation?

But wait, in case many have missed it, the star politician of the PAP camp has already started campaigning and rooting for the PAP. We have done it, our track records are there to show and to prove it. We are the best and we delivered.

Heard of the cardboard policeman? No, this one is not a cardboard politician. He was from the past, and is campaigning every night on your TV screen. The consummate politician of all time of Singapore is back. Yes, you see him. Yes, he is campaigning for the PAP. He is the Ace that would not go away. He is back!

PAP has rolled out its only ace to fight the 2015 GE. He is asking for your vote for the PAP. He is all PAP has and had to win this election and more elections in the future. Would it work again?  Would his magic work again to bring PAP to another election victory?

Another miracle in the making in the history of Singapore! The man from the past, travelled through time to fight an election campaign today. Time travel is possible in a uniquely Singapore way. Do not underestimate the resourcefulness of the PAP.

He may even appear during the election rallies on stage.

GE2015 – The opposition camp shaping up

There was a peace pipe meeting by the Indian Chiefs of the opposition camp to settle some ground rules to avoid a 3 corner fight in the coming GE. This is positive news to know that they would not be so reckless and be party spoilers by trying to fight to see who would not lose his deposit and trying to make every contest counts. Opposition parties that go into an election for the sake of being in an election, in 3 or 4 corner fights when their chances of winning or keeping their deposits are so slim reflects a mentality of stupidity that can be expected of no brainers. Or they could be the rumoured moles participating just to split the votes. You fight an election to win not for some personal ego or spurious reasons.

The NSP called for the pow wow, and hopefully everyone attended the meeting with a sincere heart, and did not go there wearing a mask to hide their real intent. Party spoilers and moles there will be, and they will appear at the right place and right time to prove their worth. And there is nothing the voters can do except to exercise their intelligence to vote them out, take them out of the equation like in the Punggol East by election. It is not easy in a GE as the party spoilers and moles would not wear a badge to be identified.

Yesterday the media highlighted the possibility of more 3 corner fights as more opposition parties are staking their claims in hotly contested GRCs. Marine Parade, Tanjong Pagar, Jurong, West Coast, Holland Bukit Timah were the few mentioned. It was also reported that WP would be contesting in 5 GRCs, SingFirst in 4 and  Reform Party 2. SDP is likely to put up 3 or 4 GRCs, NSP maybe 2 or 3, and SPP, DPP and the rest 1 or 2 each.

With 16 GRCs available, it would mean that every GRC would be contested this time and with more to spare or to be muddled in 3 corner fights. The SMCs would all be contested and there will be no walkovers. What these mean is that statistically there will be enough opposition candidates to cause an upset and a change of govt. With all the seats contested, and if there is a major ground shift, a coalition govt is a possible reality.

What is really important is that the three major parties that could put up a serious challenge with equally good candidates, ie WP, SDP and SingFirst, already could cause an upset by contesting 12 or 13 of the 16 GRCs. 9 GRCs will be enough to form a coalition govt if the SMCs are evenly split.

Would there be a new govt on Sept 13? Time to start thinking. The ball is round this time. Despite the odds, all the planning and scheming and gerrymandering, if George Yeo could be taken down, if Ah Lian and Ah Huat could send the top talents packing, anything can happen now. And who knows, Roy Ngerng could end up the dragon slayer. And if And Mo Kio and Tanjong Pagar go to the opposition, it will be all over.

This GE is going to be more unpredictable. One thing for sure, there will be more GRCs going and more ministers would be out of jobs by the sunrise on Sep 13.

Questions for Hsien Loong and the voters

Hsien Loong said these in his conversation with Heng Chee.

“It is our job to think of these issues and to make the best decisions which we can, in our judgment, on your behalf and to account to you, and say to the best of my ability this is what I have decided I have to do,” he said.

“And you may agree with it, you may not agree with it, but I can tell you in complete honesty that I am trying my best to do this on your behalf. And I cannot avoid doing this because otherwise I think I will be letting you down.”

In the above comments it gives the impression that his govt is given unlimited and unrestrained power to decide everything he thinks is right for Singaporeans. It does not matter if Singaporeans agree with him or not.  Heard of the deaf frog ideology?

Does Hsien Loong think he can change the demographic profile of Singapore by flooding the country with foreigners resulting in a changed polity with a different Singaporean identity without the consent of the Singaporeans? Does any elected govt have this authority to do so without going back to the people, going for a referendum? Does anyone really think that anyone who is a PM has a logic  and mind that is so superior to the masses that his thinking is so supreme, that what he thinks is right must be right or so what, I think so and I did it for people, no need to consult the people, happy or not is not important? This kind of thinking is understandable in a monarchy or dictatorship, but in a democracy?

Does his govt has the right to do what it wants with the people’s savings in the CPF just because he thinks it is the right thing to do? Does the govt respect the right of the people to their money?

Does his govt have the right to spend billions to provide thousands of foreigners with scholarships and living allowances without the Singaporeans agreeing to it while Singaporeans have to pay with their own money and many struggling to pay for it?

These decisions have very serious implications on the life and welfare of Singaporeans that are beyond an individual even if he is the PM of the country. How is he to account to the Singaporeans for the harm the policies and decisions could cause them? Would a, ‘I am sorry, let’s move on’ be enough?  We are talking about the lives and well beings of the 3 million odd Singaporean citizens and their children that will come after them.

How is he to account to the Singaporeans when the Singaporeans are telling him ‘No’ to these policies? The consequences of these policies would affect generations of Singaporeans to come when his mandate is only for 5 years and to be renewed again? Or is he saying, if Singaporeans do not like his policies, vote him out? Or is he saying that the majority of the Singaporeans agree to his policies that is why they continue to vote him to form the govt. So it is ok?

I can agree with the last point. If Singaporeans were to vote his party to form the govt again in the next GE, it is an endorsement of his policies and those Singaporeans who disagree, the minority, should just shut up for good. It is the mandate that the Singaporeans gave to him to do as he likes, and approved of them.

The GE is to decide if you approve of the govt’s policies or to stop the govt from continuing with policies that you disagree with and you think are harmful to you and your children’s future. Vote for the PAP if you want more of the same policies. Vote for the opposition if you have had enough of these policies. It is a Yes or No issue, no buts or to regret later and to kpkb and to be ignored after the GE.