PA is not partisan – Chan Chun Sing

The PA is a statutory board….The PA does not allow any political activity or any canvassing on our premises or in our activities. And we certainly do not mobilize anyone for any political party….If Ms Lim has any evidence of such wrongdoing. You can let me know and I guarantee you I will follow up. I will be the last person to ever allow the PA to be politicized.’  Chan Chun Sing

Chan Chun Sing made this comment in Parliament in reply to Sylvia Lim’s question that the PA is being politicized. And it is expected that he would come under scrutiny and attacks in the social media for saying such a darn truth. Many are questioning him that what he said was blatant lie, actually no one dares to call it a lie, something like they did not believe him. I would only want to caution those who said they did not believe what he said to be a bit careful here. If you said you don’t believe what a person said, you are indirectly calling the person a liar. And one can be sued in court for defamation to a minister. There is already a legal precedent set in the past in Singapore courts.

What Chan Chun Sing said is correct. If you have any evidence, bring it up to him or challenge him in court. And as to his statement in Parliament that the PA is non partisan, it is a truth that is unchallengeable. He would not have said it if it is false. For any minister to say this with his eyes wide open, with a straight face, and in Parliament, to be officially recorded, shows the kind of conviction and his strong belief that he was telling the truth and he stood by what he said. He even guaranteed to check it out if anyone has evidence to prove otherwise.

For saying this in broad daylight, it shows that he is really PM material. I don’t think any other minister would have the guts to say such a darn truth and put himself to be attacked or to be ridiculed. Some in social media are still doubting Chan Chun Sing’s suitability to be the next PM. He has proven that he is a cut above the average ministers with this clear statement of truth. Anyone dares to challenge him in court that he is not telling the truth, that he is a liar?

We are witnessing first hand the rise of our next PM. Here is a man of conviction, a man that would not mince his words to tell the darn truth and to challenge anyone to prove him wrong. That is the quality to be expected of a PM in waiting.

Singaporeans should prepare to welcome him and cheer for him as the next PM of Singapore. I bet no one would dare to challenge him and prove him wrong. This is not like the TV programme of kids saying the darnest things. This is a PM potential telling a political truth. And he meant it. This is quality stuff. You see this happening only once in 50 years.

PS. For praising Chan Chun Sing so boldly I am expecting daft sinkies to start throwing stones at me.

Interviewing a political candidate

The setting was in a posh hotel. It was done to impress the candidates that this is the right place to be, to be in the right company and everything is fine, first class stuff. All the riches money can buy. The décor and ambience were like those gold bullions and diamond bucket shops, a façade done to impress the impressionable, with superficial finesses.

The candidates must be awed by the opulence of such an interview setting. It is like walking into the temple of god, and in the company of gods. And the godlike interviewers will field their cleverly crafted questions to assess the candidates, at the same time to impress them that the interviewers are the super talents and assessing the super talents wannabes. The unspoken ethos, you need to get pass them to be seen as good enough to be a super talent. They will assess the candidate’s potential and aspiration.

In the course of a few days of interviews, the candidates tried their very best to be the one to be selected and they will muster the most ingenious ways, at times queer, but always different, to impress the godlike interviewers. Some will bring themselves so low, to prove humility, that they are in politics to serve the people, anything but for personal glory and money. They don’t mind becoming social workers, very highly paid social workers, to look after the oldies and the poor, the special needs children, a very noble sense of wanting to give to the downtrodden, to care for them. Some would go down one level further by confessing their greatest love for animals, the non sentient beans. They rather care for animals than the already blessed human beans.

The smarter ones will try to game the system. They did their homework and know what the interviewers were looking for. So they showed off their management skills and said they want to manage town councils. They know that the skill to run town council is a mandatory skill to run a country. Anyone that is incapable of running a town council means no good to run a country. Instant failure. They would not mind being paid $16,000 pm or more with the perks, to brag how well they can sweep floors and make sure public toilets are clean, and the roads have no pot holes.

The not so bright ones, who thought they are brighter, would tell the interviewers their aspirations to be great politicians, great leaders and even want to chase the rainbows, and be prime ministers or ministers. They want to live with the true spirit of meritocracy and being high achievers.

The interview is a very serious process to pick out the deserving candidates to be politicians, to be paid in the millions, at least $16,000 a month to start with, and only part time. Many candidates were picked and shortlisted, and after the interviews, many more days and nights would be spent sorting out the real and good stuff from the pretenders.

Finally, after a long wait, the list will be announced. Those aspiring to be road sweepers, to manage town councils are chosen. Those wanting to be highly expensive social workers or animal lovers were also desirable candidates, the type of people to become political leaders and to look after the welfare of animals in the islands, like stray dogs and cats. Those that want to be great leaders, to run the country, to be ministers and prime ministers, were unfortunately not chosen. Who needs such ambitious brats? There are enough godlike talents and the pyramid at the top is very narrow. No room for smart alecs and bright and ambitious politicians.

The interviewers studied their needs very carefully and picked the right people to fill in the slots from the best candidates available. They need town council managers, not political leaders, they need people who have a big heart for the down trodden, for the poor animals. They need people to sweep the floors and clean toilets. There is no need for real leaders, leaders that can solve national issues. They already have plenty of them in the stables. What, glorified and over paid social workers and animal lovers? Are they being paid too much for what they are doing? Not really, unless you want to employ foreign workers to do these jobs.

My inspiration for the above story comes from the Animal Farm. It is 100% fictional and would be good for another 100 years as a political piece of crap.

A Tribute to a Malay Intellectual – Said Zahari

‘Another unsung hero from our anti-colonial struggle in the 1950s and early 1960s has left us. Unlike the victors of history, Said Zahari, age 88, went quietly as he had done for the most part of his life, be it when he was fighting against the British for Singapore’s independence or when he sat in prison for 17 years under Lee Kuan Yew’s rule.

His calm demeanour belied a spirit of steel that saw him bear the cruelty of long imprisonment without trial and yet not for a moment compromising on his principles to seek release from incarceration.

Pak Said had publicly called Lee Kuan Yew “a political coward”. He had said only a coward would resort to jailing his opponents instead of taking them in a political contestation of ideas and letting the best man win…’   By Dr Wong Souk Yee

Wong Souk Yee wrote a tribute on Said Zahari posted in the TRE. Said was among the Malay intellectuals of the era when PAP was fighting tooth and nail with the Barisan Socialis, the left leaning political party then. Said was in the same company as those arrested during Operation Cold Store and served the second longest detention of 17 years after Chia Thye Poh, strongly committed to his cause and like Chia Thye Poh, would not denounce his belief throughout his detention.

Said was tri lingual, fluent in Malay, English and Mandarin, an asset most feared in the political arena. He was also the editor of Utusan Melayu.

One by one this first generation of political leaders will fade to oblivion only to live forever in the history books of Malaysia and Singapore.

China’s peaceful rise

Jean Pierre Lehmann, emeritus professor of international political economy at IMD, Lausanne, wrote an article on the above in the ST on 9 Apr.  His story centres on the rise of international powers starting with the Portugal, Spain , the Netherlands, Britain, France, US, Japan and The USSR.  He traced the history of these powers and the use of violence and wars as an intrinsic part of their ascents. War and violence as parts of conquest and world domination were inevitable before a new power took the pole position.

And now comes China. Would China’s rise as a super power be peaceful, be an aberration and not in the mold of the western powers, predated by wars and violence?  The western narrative has constantly harped on a belligerent and expansive China that would swing its big clubs at everyone on its way up, like the western powers. China would be like one of them, no exception. So beware, China is coming.

China today is the Number Two super power after the US. In a way, China has risen, peacefully, without the need for wars and conquest. This alone would have been enough proof that a super power can rise without resorting to violence. China is what it is today, without the need for conquest but by trade and commerce.  Is this enough to assuage the western thinkers and media to accept China as a risen power, peacefully?

The other notion, China is not there yet. It has to overtake the USA and this last step would force the issue and a war with the Americans. And in Lehmann’s view China has the right to engage in wars. It was the victim of aggression when major powers came to being. China should follow the same pattern in the rise of a super power, through war and conquest, to challenge and defeat the incumbent super power, the USA.

However, according to Lehmann, ‘if China succeeds in achieving a peaceful rise to great power status – that is, dispensing with war, pillage, slavery, conquest and exploitation – it will be the first rising great power to have done so.’ This could be a welcoming outcome if China is left alone to continue in what it is doing for the last 30 plus years. Unfortunately this may not be the case. The Americans are in the way of the peaceful rise of China with its confrontational approach towards China, the pivot to Asia, building anti China trade and military alliances, escalating and precipitating armed conflict, particularly in the Korean Peninsula and the South China Sea.  Today it is reported that the Americans would be conducting sea and air patrol in the South China Sea, not freedom of navigation, as if the South China Sea belongs to the American Empire. Here it is not China challenging the Americans to a show of force. It is the Americans that are standing up to China, confronting China and putting up obstacles to contain China’s rise.

Though the American patrol is only a token show of force, it is a bad precedent. China could ignore this little insect, but in principle it is bad. What the Americans are doing, violating other country’s sovereignty and economic zones, China could do the same. China could announce conducting air and naval patrol in American economic zones as well. Both sides can play the game of bully. The American’s blatant flexing of military muscle to exert control of the South China Sea and in the Korean region should not be ignored by the world community.

In Lehmann’s view, the world must work with China to achieve this historical aberration, that a super power can rise to the pole position without having to go the disastrous and destructive road of war.  China’s march towards the Number One super power status, to eclipse the Americans through economic means, economic development could be a possibility and only a matter of when. It is in the interest of the rest of the world that they work with China for a peaceful rise instead of following a confronational course set by the Americans.

China has risen and will continue to rise peacefully as an economic and military super power. The main protagonist against such an eventuality is the intent of the Americans and its bellicose policies towards China. China is no western nation, has its own culture and values, and is not seeking conquest and colonization. It is a super power more in the economic sense and would grow to be a bigger economic power, without having to control and colonise any country like the western powers did.

China is not seeking war, and war is unnecessary in the Chinese model to be the greatest power on earth. The world can and must work with China for this to happen, peacefully. The world must not allow the Americans to force an issue with China leading to a conflict of epic proportion and destruction. The Americans too knew that a war with China is inconceiveable. China knows that too and is trying to avoid a collision course with the Americans.

If good sense prevails, the peaceful rise of China will be a welcome aberration in the history of humankind.

Free parking is a subsidy, what about free air?

Minister of National Development Lawrence Wong today (April 11th) said that free parking in some car park spaces are not “free” and are in fact subsidies from the government.

“Free parking is not free, it’s a subsidy to the motorist, paid for by non-motorists.”

This is an example to prove that Singaporeans are daft. Only super talent can like that. It requires a very high level of intellect to reason why free parking is a subsidy.

What about free air? Is free air also a govt subsidy? What else that is free is govt subsidy? Sunlight? Haze free air?

What would opposition parties say?

 

Food for thought.