LKY – too much of a good thing

The big celebration in the remembrance of LKY on his first anniversary is starting to raise eyebrows and turning a bit sour. It is opportune that Lee Wei Ling spoke up against it and warning those over zealous supporters and believers not to go overboard. Many great leaders in the past have been revered by their people through history. Many have made their marks decades ago, some hundreds or thousands of years ago and still fondly remembered by the generations of people coming to know them.

The celebration of LKY was compared to the celebration for Mao Zedong and Winston Churchill and to some, more like Kim Sung Il. In China and North Korea, huge monuments and statues of the two leaders were built to honour them. Some in China wanted to elevate Mao to the status of a deity, 神, and probably with temples built for him for people to worship him. This was rejected by the Chinese govt and similarly I don’t think there were temples to deify Kim Sung Il.

Without someone from the family to speak out against this irrational exuberance, it can be expected that the political opportunists could carry things a bit too far in revering and remembering LKY and turn it into a personality cult that Wei Ling rightly pointed out. And when that happens, a good thing could turn into a bad thing for the stupidity of it.

Too much of a good thing can easily turn bad. This is the 21^st Century and Singaporeans, especially the highly educated, would find it a bit uncomfortable to stomach such overt expression of reverence.  This is different from religious outpouring of love within the confines of a religious abode. Some may find it revulsive though they may not utter a word or show any sign of their true feelings.  It is better to keep things in a proper and respectable perspective before it goes out of hand.

Wei Ling’s comment is timely and effective. Coming from anyone else outside the family may draw a mix bag of reactions.  LKY shall be remembered by Singaporeans for generations to come and by the foreigners who came and gone home rich for his blessings on them. Let history and the millennial remember him in a way appropriate to them.  Do not create controversies and a sour note so early after he left the scene. The first time was a nation in grief. This time it does not seem to be going the same way.

It will be perfectly alright to do such a thing in countries like North Korea, but in Singapore today, I think it is better to be more circumspect. Wei Ling has spoken but she is the only voice from the family. Is she representative of her siblings or they have different ideas?

Please feel free to disagree with me. Those who would like to set up altars in their homes, please do so as you like.

PS. For those who benefitted greatly from LKY's policies, may I suggest a better way is to donate a bit of their good fortune to help the poor in his name. Would that not be better?

The secret formula for more by elections 美人计

First there was Yaw in Hougang and followed by Palmer in Punggol East. Now we have Bukit Batok heading for another by election. The opposition strategists must be putting their thinking hats together trying to figure out how to make more by elections happening in order to get more of their candidates into parliament.

If they still cannot figure out how, maybe they can learn from the Police in their well developed investigating procedures. Put all the facts and evidence on the white board and try to pin down the common denominators. In all the three cases you have a man and a woman, actually not a man, but an MP. Then there is the element of indiscretion. So, what are the common factors and what are the relevant factors that eventually lead to a by election? Give you a clue, it is not a 4 letter word.

For those who are still trying hard but unable to find the answer, look at Sun Tsu’s military strategies, the 36 arts of war. One of them is applicable in this case. The KGB and CIA used this art form very well, and very successfully. James Bond also had been willing victim to this deception and took the risk with all its pleasures.

The big question is whether the opposition parties are ready to put this strategy into practice to gain a few more by elections: )

英雄不过美人关

Masagos worrying about Singapore’s water supply

Is Masagos missing something? He is worried that Singapore may not have enough water? Did he talk to his other ministers who are going to bring in more people to increase the population to 6.9m and then 10m? I am sure those planning for 6.9m or 10m would have the answers to our water problem. For them to be so confident about growing the population, they must have worked out the needs for more water and more energy sources. So, why is Masagos so worried when other ministers are not worried? Is he out of the loop?

Remember the incident when HDB was panicking and quickly selling of the excess stock of flats only to discover, after selling everything and running out of stock, that plane loads of foreigners are being unloaded into the island and creating the infamous housing crisis?

When the population goes up, definitively there will be bigger demand and needs for more water. Unless the new population is a kind of rare breed that don’t need to consume water, no need to bathe, then it should be ok.

Or is this a case of right hand and left hand not knowing what the other is scratching? Our planners cannot be planning for 6.9m or more and forget to think about our water problem right? They must also have thought through the need to build more flats, more Towers of Babel. Energy need should also not be a problem.

Any minister wants to tell Masagos no need to worry about a non problem. We don’t have water shortage problem or energy shortage problem, at least for a population of 6.9m or 10m.  And now we only have 5.5m, there cannot be water shortage problem right?  6.9m or 10m are a piece of cake. Everything is already planned.

Sleep well Masagos. Looks like you are the only one worrying about water shortage problem that no one sees. So either everyone is right and you are wrong or you are right and everyone is wrong. Did they tell you about the 6.9m and 10m population plan?

Bukit Batok – What is this by election all about?

This by election is not about the SDP or the PAP. It is not about Chee Soon Juan or Murali. It is about the political system, about a democratic political system for the good of the people.  The track record of the PAP was good but I am not sure what would become of Singapore and the Singaporeans with the policies of recent years. The impact of govt policies would take a longer time to gestate and to show up the faults. Our two child policy, education policy, the lack of talents for the market despite all the crowing about how good our education and planning were, the low population growth, the need to bring in plane loads of rubbish from all over the world, the recent problems caused by bad policies in housing, in the train system, the high cost of living that we have to live with, and our CPF savings, just to name a few.

We have yet to reap the full force of policy errors while we still benefiting and blinded from the good policies of the past leaders. Like in economics, the supply and demand curves will intersect and go different ways thereafter.

The intrinsic problems that we are living with and the state of denials in violating age old wisdom and throwing caution to the winds will extract a heavy price when the time comes. Let me just rattle a few of these wisdom, not in any order of merits or importance

A democracy needs two relatively strong political parties to check and balance each other and to provide an alternative govt if one falters or turns rogue. We don’t have this comfort and cushion to protect the system and the people with a one dominant party. Anyone telling you that a one dominant party is what we need is just a salesman selling his wares.

Do not put all your eggs in one basket. We know the moral of such a saying. We cannot put all our hopes and faith in one political party. You want to believe in a person telling you to put all your eggs in one basket?

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. You think there will be exceptions, and if there is, will the exception be forever? It will not last the test of time. No man is infallible.

Historically, powers entrenched would lead to abuses, to protect self interests, to exist for its own sake. Nearly every civilized country would have checks and control on their political system to prevent the entrenchment of power by any group or individual. There is wisdom in such a precaution. Only those from IMH would believe that entrenchment of power over a long period of time is a good thing.

Do not let anyone deceive you by saying the above are ok, nothing wrong, and in Singapore’s context, it is unique and these are uniquely good for us.

Bukit Batok by election is a small step to make amends to the colossal mistake the people made in the last GE, to give the PAP such an overwhelming winning margin, like giving it a blank cheque to do what it likes, a vote of over confidence. Many must be regretting the outcome not because the PAP is bad, but it is bad for the country, bad for a democratic political system, bad for checks and control, bad for the people.

It can only be good if you believe that man is infallible and all the good men are in the ruling party.

This by election is to correct this major mistake, to take a few seats back for the opposition parties, it is not about the SDP, but any opposition party, to increase the opposition representation in parliament to moderate the big majority of the ruling party. There must be bigger opposition representation in parliament and this is just a small step towards that direction.

The voters must wise up to make sure that in the next GE more opposition candidates are voted into parliament to avoid the present state of having an over dominant ruling party in charge. This by election should do that, to get in another opposition candidate to parliament. Another opposition candidate would not change the govt or create a tsunami to destroy the system. If it can, then this ruling party is not worth to be the ruling party. But it would give the people a bigger voice to check on the govt, to speak out for the people and to present alternative views on what can be good for the people.

Put aside all the differences, the main issue is greater opposition representation. Do not ignore the age old sages and their wisdom on absolute power, on entrenchment of power, on the basic principles of a democracy, on separation of power.

You are voting for the future of your children. Do not mortgage their future away.

SMRT accident – So difficult to state the facts?

Reports in the Today paper on 23 Mar stated this, ‘However, SMRT Corporation chief executive officer Desmond Kwek maintains that the two victims were walking behind their supervisor and the 15 member team were walking in single file on the 0.5m wide walkway…They were 50m away from the location of the signaling equipment at the time of the tragedy.’

My contention, if the team was walking in single file in a path for maintenance personnel, the path should be safe enough to walk on, passing safety guidelines. The train would go pass them, with a bit of squeeze, but safely.  The fact that the supervisor was in front of the single file, he would be the first to be hit if the train could hit the two behind him. What supposedly happened, the train missed hitting the first man, but could hit the second and the third, and missed the rest behind the third man. This was only possible if the train jumped track after going pass the first man, hit two men, then jumped back to the main track. Of course this was highly unlikely, impossible.

Today’s reports on 24 Mar have a bit more detail, with timeline of what happened but still left a lot of blanks to be filled. It went with the 15men team walking in single file, and ‘SMRT said before the team was allowed to step back onto the trackway it had to coordinate with the station’s signal unit “for oncoming trains to be brought to a stop and to ensure that no trains enter the affected sector”. “Our records do not show that this procedure took place.” SMRT said.’

So, were the men crossing onto the track to the signal equipment or 50 meters away? The above statement suggested that the men or some of the men were crossing the track or on the track near the equipment.  It was only in such a position, on the track that they could be hit by the oncoming train.

What is strange is that the report did not say whether they were on the track or otherwise. What was also strange is that it was a procedural lapse, never get permission to cross onto the track.

Remember, even if there was no permission requested or granted, 15 men were at the scene. Did anyone see or hear the train coming? Did anyone shout for whoever were on the track to jump off the track?  All the 15 men were blind and deaf? No one see the train coming?  How does a chicken cross the road? Wait for the traffic light to turn red.  Then look left, look right, all clear then cross. Would anyone in the middle of a road, or in this case in a train track, would be oblivious of oncoming train, no need to pay attention to look out for on coming train?

What is the true story? Were the men on the train track? Did anyone see the train coming? Did anyone shout to those on the train? Silent movie?

Oh ST quoted one of the men saying they were crossing onto the track and saying, “We didn’t realize that there was a train coming towards us…After I put my foot over the rail, my senior technical officer behind shouted: ‘Train is coming! Train is coming!’” This is about as complete as you can get. Still a question goes abegging. Why no one was assigned to watch out for oncoming trains in a ‘live firing’ area?

The train cannot hit anyone on the walkpath. If it could, it would hit the first man and the rest of the team unless it came to an immediate halt.

Even if the procedure was not followed, no record, there were 15 pairs of eyes and ears to see and hear the train coming? It was dangerous, but could the accident be avoided if the eyes and ears were open?

What do you think?