Hsien Loong - Hot button issues

In his party address to 2,500 PAP activists Hsien Loong raised two hot button issues, one, raising of GST, and two, amendment of Constitution to ensure the president is from the minority group, from time to time.

In the first issue, despite claiming that we have so many hundreds of billions, maybe trillions, in our reserves, the govt is showing signs of desperation for money, to collect money, and raising GST is what it is going to do. Why so urgent, so desperate I don't know. Only reason is money not enough. If money enough, there is no need to keep on taxing the people. Right? Or because money got so much, more reason to want to tax more, to collect more money? I leave it to you guys to guess what is wrong or right with this desperation.

I think it is ok to amend the Constitution to provide for a minority president every now and then. I also think that this is unnecessary as long as the ruling party knows what it is doing, to every now and then put up a minority president as it should be. Having to amend the Constitution is a very serious thing and in our case a very complicated thing that would only aggravate the already sensitive and emotional situation, now made more complex with the irresponsible increase in population with more new minorities becoming significant in numbers.

In the past we have the CMIO formula that was quite readily accepted. Now with minorities that may become majority, with new minorities growing in numbers, a change in the Constitution is unlikely to please anyone and may even become a problem for the future. The number of Indians is increasing rapidly and could become a majority or near majority. The number of Pinoys, Myanmese and whatever tribes are also growing. How to cater to these new minorities?

We used to lump the significantly lesser minorities as Others conveniently. But if their numbers grow, would it be necessary to include in the Constitution for a Pinoy PM, a Malay PM, an Indian PM, maybe a Myanmese PM etc in the future? Would the now bigger Others be able to be grouped under Others when their numbers become significant to demand their rightful place in the island that once did not belong to them?

What would happen if Indians and Chinese are equal in numbers in the future, or nearly equal in numbers when the difference is undefined? Is there a need to define how many is necessary to be considered majority or minority? Hypthetically, what if the distribution becomes 40% Chinese, 35% Indians, 15% Malay and 10% Others? When the Chinese are no longer the absolute majority, and the minorities are not significantly lesser than the Chinese, how would the majority minority formula be defined or redefined? Would the current presumptive formula in the about to be amended Constitution still be valid and relevant?

Amending the Constitution on racial grounds is opening a can of worms that would be difficult to put back in. This is truly playing with fire as no formula is going to be right or acceptable to all. I would suggest stick to the present formula and do not try to fix something that is not broken. There is no one formula that would please everyone and it is better to stay with what we have now.

CECA - what is real and what is fake news

'Among these was the claim that CECA has allowed Indian nationals to take PMET (professional, managerial, executive and technician) jobs away from Singaporeans.

Mr Chan clarified that all FTAs, including CECA, place no obligations on Singapore with regard to immigration.

"Indian professionals, like any other professionals from other countries, have to meet MOM's (Ministry of Manpower's) existing qualifying criteria to work in Singapore. This applies to Employment Pass, S Pass, and work permit.

"Second, CECA does not give Indian nationals privileged immigration access. Anyone applying for Singapore citizenship must qualify according to our existing criteria," said Mr Chan....

While Mr Chan acknowledged that economic uncertainties have created anxieties over job security, he asserted that perpetuating fear, is not the right response.

"We understand, and we share Singaporeans' concerns with competition and job prospects in the current uncertain economic environment. But the way to help Singaporeans is not to mislead them and create fear and anger," said Mr Chan....

Mr Chan said that MOM is aware of companies that have breached fair hiring practices and will weed them out to protect Singaporean workers and businesses.  

Source: CNA/hs
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/chan-chun-sing-clarifies-ceca-ramesh-erramalli-12078768

In the above report Chan Chun Sing explained that while Singapore allows Indian nationals to work in Singapore under CECA terms, Singapore's Immigration rules still  override the terms in the CECA to protect the interests of Singaporeans. What about the special clauses that allow 127 Indian professions to come in with no need to check their qualifications, in a way recognising every and any shit institutions in India?

In 2017, the Indian govt threatened to sue the Singapore govt for tightening the immigration rules to regulate the free flow of Indian nationals under the CECA terms. 

India had signed its first ever CECA with Singapore in August, 2005, under which both sides have a preferential tariff arrangement for over 80 product lines. Besides, India and Singapore enjoy greater access in services and investment under CECA.

The CECA's second review was launched in May, 2010, but since then the review had been held up mainly on two important issues. One is allowing Indian banks to Singapore and second the free movement of Indian professionals. I think this has been enhanced since to make it easier for the Indian professionals to come in, unchecked.

The Singapore government, in its effort to reduce reliance on foreign workers, passed the ‘Employment Pass Framework’ in 2010 under which the foreign share of the total workforce has to be brought down to around one-third by the companies located there, while encouraging employers to invest in productivity in return for incentives in the form of tax breaks.  Is this being practised in Singapore's 'Chennai' Business Park in Changi? There have been so many eyewitnesses claiming that on entering these offices they are shocked to see at least 80% of the workers are Indians.

However, India has argued that while Singapore has done this to address its own domestic concerns, it had committed a separate provision under CECA, exempting India from such a rule. The matter has taken a political colour now….’

Since then there was no more threats of India suing Singapore. Maybe some agreements had been reached that satisfied India's demand for more free flow of Indian nationals or some relaxation on the part of Singapore's immigration rules. Whatever, if the Indian govt is not complaining, it means they are very happy with the arrangement. On the Singapore side, everything very quiet except that the unemployment of PMETs and young Singaporean graduates get worse by the days.

Now it is exploding and everyone is talking about it. The opposition parties are also raising this as a major issue in the coming GE. What is real or fake can only be judged by the numbers of Indian PMETs here versus the sad and miserable stories of Singaporean graduates losing their jobs or unable to get a decent job, not half baked part time jobs or as Grab drivers or Grab delivery boys and girls.

In the past there was this policy of allowing foreign graduates to work in Singapore if they came from recognised and reputtable universities. Today this is forgotten and with CECA, any rubbish universities, real or fake also can, and their dubious and funny graduates are now in top positions in Singapore's economy, bossing around and ridiculing our local graduates from the world's best universities overseas and our NUS and NTU.

It is time to reintroduce the practice of only recognising the degrees of good and reputable universities, not karang guni universities and back lane degree mills.How would this affect the unbelieveable loose conditions in the CECA if it is implemented?

PS. Thanks Frog Outside Glass for the below extracts from CECA.

CECA Article 9.3 Para 3 states:

"Neither Party shall require labour market testing, economic needs testing or other procedures of similar effects as a condition for temporary entry in respect of natural persons upon whom the benefits of this Chapter are conferred.”

Article 9.5: Long-Term Temporary Entry:

"Intra-Corporate Transferees:

1. Unless there has been a breach of any of the conditions governing temporary entry, or an application for an extension of an immigration visa has been refused on such grounds of national security or public order by the granting Party as it deems fit, each Party shall grant temporary entry to an intra-corporate transferee of the other Party, who otherwise meets its criteria for the grant of an immigration visa, for an initial period of up to two years or the period of the contract, whichever is less. The period of stay may be extended for period of up to three years at a time for a total term not exceeding eight years.

Professionals

2. Each Party shall grant temporary entry and stay for up to one year or the duration of contract, whichever is less, to a natural person seeking to engage in a business activity as a professional, or to perform training functions related to a particular profession, including conducting seminars, if the professional otherwise complies with immigration measures applicable to temporary entry, on presentation by the natural person concerned of:

(a) Proof of nationality of the other Party;

(b) Documentation demonstrating that he or she will be so engaged and describing the purpose of entry, including the letter of contract from the party engaging the services of the natural person in the host Party; and

(c) Documentation demonstrating the attainment of the relevant minimum educational requirements or alternative credentials.”

3. Each Party shall process expeditiously applications for temporary entry from natural persons of the other Party, including requests for further extensions. Each Party shall notify applicants for temporary entry, either directly or through their prospective employers, of the outcome of their applications, including the period of stay and other conditions.”

Unless there are valid reasons concerning National Security, Public Order or Public Health, all applications for the 127 listed industries and fields should be approved without delay. That means approval is just a formality.

CECA also provides spouses and dependents of Indian PMETs granted employment pass in Singapore to be employable in Singapore. This is stated in Article 9.6:

"For natural persons of a Party who have been granted the right to long term temporary entry and have been allowed to bring in their spouses or dependants, a Party shall, upon application, grant the accompanying spouses or dependants of the other Party the right to work as managers, executives or specialists (as defined in paragraphs 2(f)(i) to (iii) of Article 9.2), subject to its relevant licensing, administrative and registration requirements. Such spouses or dependants can apply independently in their own capacity (and not necessarily as accompanying spouses or dependants) and shall not be barred by the Party granting them the right to work from taking up employment in a category other than that of managers, executives, or specialists solely on the ground that they as the accompanying spouses or dependants are already employed in its territory as managers, executives or specialists.”

Conclusion

Reading the relevant critical details, one can’t help but conclude that CECA has basically given Indian Nationals (including their dependents) unlimited access to Singapore's jobs markets on a No-delay fast-track approval channel and, therefore, many Singaporeans' rice bowls have literally been handed over by the PAP elites to India Nationals.
 

Brad Bowyer - A plea to reclaim Singapore for Singaporeans

'To make matters worse, behind all that is an air of entitlement and unaccountability from a group who pursues policies that appear ever more clearly to be meant for the benefit of the few and to the detriment of the many. Policies and economic models that are moreover being put forward by a team who inherited most of what they have, who are insular and far less competent than their forebears, and are designing and implementing ways to make the nation unlivable for all but their chosen few.

So this coming election won’t just be about restoring good governance and running the nation as a country for all the people again. It will be about the very survival of the ordinary citizen in the face of what I can only describe as a cold, calculating and, for want of a better word, vicious “elite” who have no compunction to sacrifice anything or anyone to stay in their positions of power because they must know in their hearts exactly how undeserving they are and exactly what they are doing to Singapore as a whole.

This Machiavellian group must be ejected before the damage they are doing becomes irreparable. Already our society is fracturing and faltering and our country and culture is drowning in a sea of imports and the worst top down examples of extreme capitalism, callousness and indifference towards others. Poverty is growing, suicides are increasing and depression, stress, unhappiness and a sense of isolation are becoming widespread. We are now feeling like outsiders in our own country and it is only getting worse.'

The above are quoted from Brad Bowyer's article posted in the TRE. I am putting them up for discussion here. In the first paragraph Brad talked about entitlement mentality, a phrase that is often used to belittle Singaporeans for wanting to be treated like citizens for their sacrifices and the contributions of our forbears in building this successful city. Yes, we Singaporeans and our forbears built this island to what it is, not the wildlife that came recently, claiming that they built this city and some silly dumbasses also echoed this myth, that we owed it to the wildlife that came after we have made this island a success. We are entitled to a better life in this island than the wildlife. We don't owe the wildlife anything. They are parasites here to fleece on what we have built.

But what about the entitlement mentality of the elite that Brad Bowyer said above? What are the entitlements that the elites are demanding and taking them for granted, taking the people for granted? In short, economic benefits and power to the few that ruled the island as if it belongs to them. For mediocre performance they are demanding to be paid out of this world salaries as elected politicians, non employees that designed their own jobs as if they are employees with career path and salaries that can go up and up.

The people have been going along with the govt for several decades without questioning as they too benefited from the growing affluence and success of the island and economy. But this success story that benefits everyone is starting to look different, with the majority of the working class starting to feel the pinch, working furiously and desperately to make ends meet while the elites enjoy their world class living and lifestyle and demanding for more and more. The social divide is widening everyday with many of the pioneer generations have to work as cleaners to survive their golden years.

The survival of the ordinary citizens is at stake as Brad Bowyer said, 'inn the face of what I can only describe as a cold, caluculating and, for want of a better word, vicious "elite" who have no compunction to sacrifiice anything or anyone to stay in their positions of power...socienty is fracturing and faltering and our county and culture is drowning in a sea of imports...We are now feeling like outsiders in our own country and it is only getting worse.'

I can't disagree with Brad Bowyer's perception of the new realities that are affecting the people in general except for the elites and the few fools here earning a few dollars and thinking that they are very successful and pretending to be very happy with what is going on.

What do you think? Do you think it is time to reclaim our country from the elites and the wildlife they brought in?

US Asean relations - A snub for a snub

'An offer by the United States to host a Pacific rim summit in America in 2020 after Chile abruptly cancelled this year's event was "not a good idea", Malaysia's foreign minister said Thursday.

The sharp retort comes days after most southeast Asian leaders snubbed a meeting with US officials in Thailand when President Donald Trump failed to show.

The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit had been scheduled for November 16-17 in Chile, but President Sebastian Pinera pulled out of hosting it because of ongoing civil unrest in the country.

According to Malaysian Foreign Minister Saifuddin Abdullah, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called him during a meeting of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) leaders in Bangkok last week.

Pompeo told him that "because Chile is not able to host APEC this November... the US is thinking of hosting APEC somewhere in January in the US", and asked for Malaysia's position.

Saifuddin said he told US officials in Bangkok that "we don't think it is a good idea".'

The above Yahoo report said it all, the Emperor cannot always have his way, to snub the smaller countries as and when he likes and think the smaller countries would continue to bow to the Emperor's wishes. Trump did not think the APEC Summit was important enough for him to turn up. Instead he sent junior ministerial rank advisors to the Summit in US national security advisor Robert O'Brien and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. He thought the Asean heads of states would only be suitable to meet these two junior officials instead of himself, the Emperor.

Then in return he 'invited' or summoned the Asean leaders to his summit in the US. Come pay your respect to the Emperor in the White House. At the APEC Summit most of the Asean leaders snubbed the meeting with the US representatives except for 3 hard core cronies. The new directive from the Emperor is again snubbed by Asean leaders with Malaysia taking the lead. The days when the Emperor called the shot is over. The Empire is now a shadow of its past and no longer feared or held in awe by the smaller countries. The Empire and the Emperor can be ignored, just like that.

The Americans must not think too highly of themselves in Asean except for a few capitals that still see the white men as gods. The Asean countries may be smaller but they have pride and dignity. Do not summon or beckon them to do your bids at your becks and calls.

How valid is CPF's reply on Clifford Theseira's case?

A 72-year-old CPF payee recently became a Grab driver, and shared on Facebook to the whole world how a measly S$575 monthly payout made his existence difficult to bear.
As expected, the FB post went viral prompting the CPF Board to respond quickly.
According to the Board, Mr Clifford Theseira, failed to present the whole picture and presented only a portion of the entire story.
“Mr Theseira had withdrawn a total of about S$140,000 from his CPF since turning 55. If Mr Theseira had not done so, his monthly payout could be more than S$1,000 per month,” said the Board.


“In addition, Mr Theseira co-owns a 5-room HDB flat which is fully paid up,” the Board authorities stressed.
Based on Mr Theseira’s version of the story posted on Sept 24, despite having around S$60,000 in his Medisave, his monthly CPF payouts amounted only to S$575. According to the aged retiree, he had to seek employment despite his age and became a Grab driver to support his wife.
But old age has made him incapable of driving for long hours and he claimed that his income as Grab driver is not enough to even pay his income tax obligations. He was also asked to top up his Medisave, or risk having his licence revoked. He then posted a photo of a letter from the CPF Board to this effect.
But the CPF Board repudiated Mr Theseira’s allegations.
“As stated in the letter shown in his post, Mr Theseira could contribute his Medisave monthly via Giro,” it said. The Board added that the Giro payment plan would amount to less than 1 per cent of his monthly income.
“As long as he makes regular CPF contributions, which is no different for all other workers, he will be able to renew his licence when it becomes due in July next year,” CPF management added.

The above is quoted from TRE and is a good example of the high cost of living in Singapore and how the seniors are coping or unable to cope and have to work in their ripe old age just to survive. With $575 monthly payout and a flat that is fully paid, Theseira and his wife would be in serious financial trouble to provide food on the table. I read some surveys saying that a person would need about $1,379pm to live in this expensive city. So, how could $575 pm be enough for Theseira and his wife who also has medical bills to pay? Even if he is to have $1,000 pm if he had not withdrawn his CPF savings early would not make much of a difference.

The whole argument about Theseira having a 5 rm flat is hogwash. But this is the new formula of this garment, that seniors must sell their homes, downgrade to live. It is a cold, calculative thinking, with no consideration to other factors like emotional attachment to a home, the comfort level and familiarity of living in a home. To those who think selling a home to convert to cash is the way to go, it shows that these people are inhumans, treating the seniors as digits with no feelings and sentiments. Come with nothing, go with nothing.

By the way, why should a person at 72 still be forced to contribute to his CPF in the Medisave? People at this age and above are counting every day alive as a bonus. Why the need to save some more? Whose fricking idea is this? Old folks struggling to survive, having to work at such an advanced age and still need to save for retirement, for the future?

What do you think? What is CPF about in the first place? What happens to the age when a person is allowed to withdraw his CPF savings? At 72, a person should be allowed to withdraw all this CPF savings, not to contribute more into it. Any contribution to the CPF must be voluntary.