Not good enough...

Yam Ah Mee - Returning Officer Extraordinaire!

"Pursuant to Section 49, Sub-Section 7E, Paragraph A of the Parliamentary Elections Act"

"Total volts cast", "Rejected volts"

"Yoyoyoyoyo George!"

Potong Pasir bows to Imperial forces, Rebel base to be absorbed into the Empire

Aljunied fortress falls to the rebels, liberated serfs jubilant

The West submits to the Empire, conservative elements prevail in Holland-Bukit Timah

Empire retains Northern settlements, new colonies to expand

Rebels repelled in close fight at East Coast, former rebel leader fails to take Pioneer

New citizens assist the Empire, Rebel assault repelled at Bishan-Toa Payoh

Vader claims AMK and Sengkang

West coast falls the the Empire

The Northeast has fallen

Support rises in Hougang

Joo Chiat - Charles Chong won by 2% margin, no recount, absentees blamed (Happy Mothers' Day constituents!)

12.30am 8 May - The Empire captures SMCs around Coruscant, Moulmein-Kallang GRC falls

11.00pm 7 May - The seat of power, Coruscant eyes the rest of the republic

Walkover after Nomination Day

An uneasy vote for Workers' Party

You may have been following this blog over the past two weeks, and felt dismayed that there aren’t any new posts since May 2^nd.

I will not give any excuses, fatigue has set in.

It was easy to follow and debate issues when the relevant parties have made public statements that allow readers to analyze and understand the context to which the statements are being made. For instance, when it high housing prices were brought into the public domain for discussions, we realize that the issue is linked to government mandated retirement savings (CPF) and the government’s accumulation of reserves. In this case, it leads one to suspect that the state is accumulating national reserves at the expense of citizens’ savings and retirement plans via the national policy of public housing. Policy insiders, the online community as well as the opposition parties have spent enormous amount of time putting things into perspective just so the root of the problem becomes apparent.

These few days, it became increasingly difficult to do so.

Mainstream media has led alternative media by the nose, diverting everyone from important policy issues to prominent new opposition party candidates such as Nicole Seah and Chen Show Mao. And then there was the attempt by Dr Vivian Balakrishnan to insinuate that Dr Vincent Wijeysingha wants to legalize sex with boys aged 14. Not to mention numerous one liners from the incumbent such as defining “First world parliament”, “Co-driver” and “putting on the record wanting to form a new government.” The of course most recently there is the accusation by Lim Hwee Hua that Hougang Town Council records are suspect during election rally week. Not to mention the occasional sticks and carrots approach of the MM making threats to Aljunied voters, the fear and uncertainty of a “freak” election result and municipal upgrading plans for selective constituencies.

I am tired of this bickering. The incumbents are trying very hard to divert attention away from policy mishaps that snowballed into a real disasters of epic proportions. The case is closed when angry people took the troll bait and returned with an emotional response, resulting in the issue not being discussed constructively and polarizing the ambivalent and unconscious masses from the vocal segment of the population who appear angry because they are the "losers" in the system.

It is apparent to me, and to others who are following key issues that the incumbent does not wish to discuss the externalities created by PAP policies and poor execution. Nor did the incumbent care to explain.

For years, the PAP has enjoyed an enviable relationship with its voters. Since Singapore’s independence, people look to the PAP to solve the long term economic prospects of the nation. And delivered they did, as inbound FDI created many jobs for Singaporeans. People have not stopped looking to them for new economic ideas even as the PAP’s economic performance over the last 2 decades has been less than spectacular with increasing competition from abroad. But as long as the PAP continue providing citizens with good jobs and affordable public housing, people tolerated its authoritarian rule over civil society (“fixing” dissenters by detention without trial, bankrupting them through lawsuits) and mixed success in rejuvenating the economy, hoping the PAP can create yet another economic miracle as they did before.

Alas, lightning did not strike twice. The recent decade has seen China’s ascension into the WTO. Their pre-eminence is troubling to all developed nations with any manufacturing capacity. This alone deserves a few separate posts, so I will summarize my points. I am in the opinion that any corporation operating internationally will always choose the cheapest labour source for manufacturing regardless of its labour productivity or the deployment of physical capital and machinery. In the last 2 decades and probably in the next 2, all-in cost of labour, transportation, taxes and capital deployed at “emerging” Asian economies would be more favourable than newly industrialized nations such as Singapore.

Manufacturing has a limited role to play in Singapore’s future, and that is something I think both the incumbent government as well as some independent observers can agree. A focus on the services sector is the way to go and that is already taking shape today. Port, transportation, financial, healthcare and hospitality services is the way to go for the future viability of Singapore as a nation.

Like all quick fix solutions, there is a price to pay. And it is not merely the stipend of the “millionaire” Ministers who spearhead the bold transformation.

New industries are not created overnight. The shortage of skilled labour is a key impediment to starting any new industries from scratch, hence a liberal labour policy is critical in order to fill the acute shortages in the labour market. Up to this point, I agree with the incumbent government’s labour policy of importing skilled labour to make up for the shortage. This is the harsh reality of globalization that we must deal with, and the PAP has provided an adequate policy option.

SO, CAN THE PAP GOVERNMENT TELL ME WHY THEY ALLOW ENTRY-LEVEL WHITE-COLLAR WORKERS INTO THE COMMERCIAL SERVICES SECTORS?

Obviously the implementation of these policies benefits Singapore as a city state. Because higher quality workers lead to a more vibrant economy with better jobs for all, agreed? More competition in schools and workplace brings out the competitive spirit in all of us and in turn produces better outcome, yes?

In theory, yes. In practice, there are many externalities to contend with. Such as job enclaves in certain industries and discriminatory workplace practices targeting working mothers and NSmen. Remember, the PAP government’s labour policy effectively translates to a fairly elastic labour supply. Free market is good for all you say? Tell that to the mother who is fired after conceiving her second child with the same employer, or NSman who is first to be retrenched in a restructuring exercise. These are some of the discriminatory employment practices that pervades the local economy, of which the failure to deal with externalities and finetune implementation of a mostly sensible policy renders it largely a failure.

Remember the initial intention was to kickstart certain targeted segments of the economy. Business interests questioned why certain segments are favoured over others. Most evidently as mentioned earlier, to prevent a hollowing out of the economy by way of shifting of multinational company operations to countries with the cheapest labour cost, foreign labour is injected into the Singapore job market instead. Small businesses also wanted a piece of the action. It seems like multiple business interests have lobbied for the free incoming immigration policy, which presumably solves labour shortages because Singapore labour is "choosy" compared to that of other developing nations.  

For emphasis I shall ask again:

Q: WHY DOES THE PAP GOVERNMENT ALLOW ENTRY-LEVEL WHITE-COLLAR WORKERS INTO THE COMMERCIAL SERVICES SECTORS? 

TO MANAGE SHORTFALL IN LABOUR?

TO KICKSTART NEW INDUSTRIES?

OR SOMETHING MORE SINISTER?

A: THE PAP GOVERNMENT DECIDED THAT YOU SHOULD SUBSIDIZE BUSINESS INTERESTS WITH YOUR WAGES FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT, WHO CAN  WITHHOLD CORPORATE TAXES IN SINGAPORE.

That is my take. The result is stagnating wages across all segments of the job market while profit margins improve for businesses. 

Good for Singapore? Certainly looks like a good idea with more tax revenue.

Good for Singapore Citizens? If you continue to be an employee, probably not in your lifetime.

The PAP’s labour policies need fine-tuning, but they are not about to listen to you anytime soon. Many of the PAP MPs hold fulltime jobs while being paid a monthly stipend by the government that is roughly 5x the median household income of Singaporeans (not sure if the statistics refer to Citizens + PR). I am almost sure that they do not spend more than 10 hours with their constituents every week. Hence I can be fairly confident to assert that many are not aware of the challenges facing a regular salaried worker in Singapore.

Besides, not all MPs are made equally, some have higher intellectual horsepower to debate pertinent issues while others are savants in administrating their municipals. Some are attracted to politics by:

1) more self-centred and intrinsic reasons such as personal branding and tapping into the “establishment’s” business and social network, while others are urged by

2) a calling, and the altruism to serve the people or to right some socio-political injustice.

Not to mention 3) the MP allowance of $14k per annum is quite tantalizing for many others. (Especially, the soon-to-be elected parliamentarian Ms Tin Pei Ling, age 27, who draws a salary of 3-5k as a Senior Associate working fulltime at E&Y. Did I also mention her husband is a senior civil servant working alongside PM Lee?)

Surely both the PAP and the alternative parties have characters whose intrinsic motivations for entering politics need to be examined more closely. Will they voice your concerns to the parliament? Are they go-getters who can solve problems at the constituency level? Are they leaders who can inspire others to do serve the community? Their characters matter as much as the party they represent. Alas, opposition candidates face uphill tasks of knowing and getting known by constituents with electorial boundaries constantly redrawn and announced only a few months before nomination and minimal mainstream media coverage.

Which party they represent matters immensely in the case of Singapore. Candidates joining the establishment are either on the fast track to a million-dollar salary via a ministerial appointment or hold token parliamentarian roles, which will also provide additional stipend for doing nothing extra. (eg. Mr Teo Ser Luck is Senior Parliamentarian, do wat huh?) If your MP is from the PAP, do you think he will speak out for you and risk offending the powers that be, who will assess whether he or she should stay on the gravy train?

If you are unhappy with the PAP’s policies or its implementation, you stand a better chance of having them debated rigorously in parliament by someone 1) who does not receive tangible benefits from the PAP (by definition, all PAP cadres receive benefits or benefits-in-kind) and 2) who spends enough time understanding the issues and its implications on those affected. A part-time PAP MP just isn’t going to be able to represent me voicing out unhappiness over national policies or offer feasible alternatives.

Tomorrow I go to the polls deciding between the incumbents and the Workers’ Party. I reside in a GRC, where I can visibly see the physical changes that benefited the elderly in the constituency. The work is excellent, but it is most likely the tireless work of 1 out of the 4 MPs in this constituency. This buy-1-get-3-free bundle deal is farcical, because all 4 parliamentarians have added little value to the legislative discussions and is likely to continue toeing the party line as their personal fortunes are tied closely to the fate of the establishment.

Local municipal issues can only do so much to control the damage from poor implementation of national policies, most flawed being ultra-liberal immigration, the root of all evil in this election. Liberal immigration leads to suppression of wages for low and middle income workers, both blue and white collar alike. It causes strain to public infrastructure such as public housing, education and transportation.

"We are not an anti-immigration party"

The line “We are not an anti-immigration party” from the Workers’ Party rings uneasily in my ears. I confess not wanting to hear much from them after that. Obviously immigrants are not to be blamed, the ruling government is to be blamed for turning on the spigot too rapidly. I am disappointed that the party did not discuss the rampant abuse of the liberal immigration policy and take a more hardline stance on correcting these abuses. Nor are their views exactly inspiring. I would also have expected evocative soundbytes like “preserving the dignity of labour” to come from WP, but alas it didn’t and would probably never. That line came from the SDP, which has proposed a minimum wage (which i think, while increasing business costs, it would create good blue collar jobs to Singapore citizens, especially the elderly and the working poor). Instead the WP have positioned themselves to be PAPzi-lite or the Singapore B-team, for better or worse.

Perhaps the WP feels that it can only have a bigger say in policy making with more parliamentary seats in this election. It appears the WP is shadowing the PAP, most certainly this serves to appeal to the broad masses previously convinced of PAP’s economic policies. Hopefully this gambit will eventually translate positively to swing votes from the middle ground to the WP. In terms of candidate quality, they certainly have a better slate this election, especially in Aljunied GRC and the SMCs. 

For now, what is most important for Singapore is to have capable alternative voices able to question government policies and make positive improvements and changes within the legislative assembly, and I can understand the practical nature of pandering to the middle ground who presumably desires “business-as-usual” with policy tweaks after the elections. 

Singapore needs an alternative voice with bite. This election, I will vote for the alternative party because the situation is truly dire in Singapore today and I shudder at the possibility of an 87-0 outcome.

As far as I am concerned, party credo is more important than candidate personalities. Does not matter where one gets their tertiary education, or whether they have minor personality flaws. It matters what party he or she represents, and what his or her party stand for. Many of the candidates standing for election on the opposition slate look and sound mature and reliable enough to handle municipal issues facing their constituencies. Some of these may even be fairly competent parliamentarians who can intelligently debate legislation.

Only time will tell whether the Workers' Party is a moderate Labour party capable of reaching compromise between business and labour, or a complete sellout of ordinary Singapore citizens in the face of a strong business lobby. Let's hope my suspicions turn out to be a false alarm.

Only one way to find out.

Monday 2 May - Gerrymandering and harassment continues beneath the facade of orderliness

Rally Roundup

- "Rally Roundup: Day 5": PAP - We have done well, but don't take us for granted; WP: PAP has abused its power; SDP: Cast aside your fear; SPP: The ship will not sink; NSP: Manpower policies take centrestage; RP: Jeyaratnam calls for minimum wage (The Satay Club)

- "Live updates for tonight's rallies" (The Online Citizen)

Mudslinging and Other Dirty Tricks (ODTs)

- "Wah lau, TNP, buay pai seh ah?": Dr Chee did not lead a march, as The New Paper has reported. Yet the paper has published and fabricated facts in which many eyewitnesses in the rally could testify. The antics are clearly aimed at misinforming people who rely on the mainstream media solely for information on the elections. (The Online Citizen)

- "On the topic of loose cannons": More tirades against TNP reporters Melvin Singh and Bryna Sim on inaccuracies and fabrication of facts pertaining to the SDP rally. (The Online Citizen)

Blogger note: I apologize for the lack of timeliness in the updates. There are just too many issues to read and digest everything in a timely fashion. I will try at least one post per issue on a periodic basis to keep it relevant for readers. Meanwhile, watch this space for flash updates when they become available.

Some previous posts seem to have been taken down since I posted them. For instance my favorite MP Teo Ser Luck's maiden rally, brainbummer's one post blog on a freak election result. Guess they became viral on their own merits and got taken down by the authorities.

Lui Tuck Yew, you are a gutless minion. 

Selected speeches on Day 4 - PAP government is a revenue machinery where you pay; Part-time MPs cannot do their jobs well; Uplift the community, not the flats

PAP Raymond Lim speaks to constituents in East Coast

Just in case you didn't know, he was Transport Minister when the amazing revenue machinery that is the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) was implemented.

SDP Michelle Lee blasts flawed national policies, commits to municipal issues

Quote:

"CPF pays us 2.5%, whereas inflation is 5%. This means you pay 2.5% to the CPF to hold your money for you. Perhaps the PAP thinks this is considered fund management fees, except we do not get to change our fund manager."

"Dr Vivian Balakrishnan's ministry MCYS budget doubled from 898 million (2008) to 1.8 billion (2009), which includes $400m for YOG. With such a bloated budget for MCYS, has it benefited you? The poor under the public assistance scheme has their allowance increased by a little over $1 a day since last month."

NSP Steve Chia criticizes incumbent Pioneer PAP MP, says CCTV will not solve the problems of foreign workers littering, urinating at the estate

(The video above by TODAYdigital has been edited. For the full video, please follow this links, Part 1 where he addresses minorities, Part 2 his rally in English, Part 3, Part 4)

Quote:
(In full version Part 2): "Your vote is secret. ... I have been hearing rumours that RC people have been telling residents the PAP know who you vote for.... It is illegal for (grassroots, RCs, MPs) to know who you vote for. If they say (so), tell them 'come with me to the police station, tell the police officer.' "

"To solve this problem, get active citizen patrol, talk to foreign workers to educate them. It is a process that we need to inculcate them. It takes time. Is he (the PAP candidate) willing to spend time to do that?"

"Another solution is to move the (foreign workers') dormitories to Upper Joo Koon where there are no HDB flats. Can they (the PAP) do that?"

WP Pritam Singh lambastes the PAP for linking votes to upgrading, commits to examining issues facing the Malay community

Quote:
"In the next few months, Singapore will hold another election, the Presidential election. I strongly urge George Yeo to contest in the Presidential Election... Maybe the best losing candidate in the PAP can be allowed to stay in parliament as NCMP"

(On why he did not join PAP) "It lies in the PAP's policy in linking votes to upgrading. All this policy does is to divide Singapore and divide Singaporeans. If war comes to Singapore tomorrow, we will all be standing shoulder to shoulder, regardless of race, religion or constituency. How can any self-respecting Singaporean join the ruling party which behaves in such a morally reprehensible manner?"

(On educational performance of Malay community) "My fear is that the Malay community, like the Indian community may be stuck in a trap that we cannot get out of. In spite of tuition grants and bursary, it seems that no one has been brave enough to say, 'This may not be working. Let's relook at things.' We need a comprehensive review of the educational system. To the PAP, I say this 'It cannot be business as usual.' "

Sunday 1 May - NSP, SDP election posters secretly torn down; Debunking the myth of linking property value with voting in PAP

Says a 1000 words:

(Credits to Yawning Bread)
- "Opposition Parties need to focus on swing votes": Alex Au believes Quadrant D is staunchly supportive of the opposition cause. In order to engage the swing voters, they need to address fear of voting against the incumbents and the idealism of creating a better Singapore. (Yawning Bread)


Rally Roundup
- "Rally Roundup: Day 4" PAP: "Opposition providing false hope"; WP: "PAP policies morally reprehensible";   SDP: "Focus on the community"; RP: "Investments, Foreign talent policies slammed", NSP: "Income disparity needs to be addressed" (Full article at Satay Club)


Mudslinging and Other Dirty Tricks (ODTs)
- Leading alternative media Temasek Review site remains inaccessible in Singapore since announcement of elections; DDOS attacks suspected to be the cause of crashing the alternative news website just before it became inaccessible

- "NSP posters torn down in Chai Chee" (Singapore Elections)

- "PAP actively sabotaging SDP posters": Eyewitnesses testify against unknown vehicle pulling down the election posters of opposition parties (Singapore Elections)

- "Are SDP posters being taken down?": SDP posters reportedly taken down at Yuhua, Bukit Panjang and Admiralty constituencies (Your SDP, Singapore Democratic Party's website)


Adding to the discourse and debunking myths
- "Two personalities and the economic debate": Tan Kin Lian weighs in on discourse between Tan Jee Say and Lim Hng Kiang, saying that Mr Lim seem to have put words into Mr Tan's mouth by saying Mr Tan wanted to phase out manufacturing, which is not explicitly suggested in Mr Tan's plan. The strong response by Mr Lim is shocking, uncalled for, and so inaccurately reported on the mainstream media that the blogger felt he needed to help clarify Mr Tan's stance to debunk the MSM's undue influence. (TKL and Associates)

- "Property values and your choice of political party": PAP has taken us on a path of gradual deterioration over the last 5 years. The PAP has the potential to do well. If you support the PAP, you should vote the opposition so as to shock them awake from complacency. On the role of an MP, there are many things an MP does, such as debating national issues, and solve residents' and the community's day-to-day problems. An MP does not have a say in many of the things that will improve your property value. The actual municipal tasks of running the constituency is not difficult at all for most of the candidates. If voting an opposition MP affects housing value, Hougang should be badly affected by Mr Low who was MP for 20 years. (Mr Wang Says So)

Selected speeches on Day 3 - "I am not a brave man. But I love Singapore, and I love Singaporeans," says Chiam; "Lose weight or else get off my boat" says Gan

SPP Chiam See Tong's homecoming at Potong Pasir

Quote:
"The reason why I go to Bishan-Toa Payoh is to promote democracy in Singapore. You cannot have democracy in Singapore with just 2 opposition members in parliament."

"Do you know Mr Lee Kuan Yew said in one election rally one day? 'Who is this man Chiam See Tong?' He took the trouble to go through my O Level results. I am not ashamed of my O Level results. I have 5 O Levels, but I later became a lawyer."

NSP Steve Chia shows the incumbents the unhappiness of the masses, chides PAP for losing its focus 

Quote:
(Hands up on cost of living, escalating housing prices and widening income gap) "This is what we want the media to show. Do you want the media to put it (the video clip) up? Mediacorp, mainstream media will you put it up?"
Steve Chia is former NCMP for NSP. More at Steve4Pioneer channel on Youtube.

PAP Tin Pei Ling wants to install energy saving lightbulbs in Marine Parade

Pei Ling's public speaking style is still far from one of a seasoned politician. Her speech in the first 5 mins reminds me of my own story recital in Primary School. The "energy-saving lightbulb" idea sounds like something taken out of a Pre-U Seminar session. Sorry to say that her political credibility has been completely tarnished.

PAP Gan Kim Yong addresses constituents, defends his Ministry by highlighting Jobs Credit and Workfare programs

Quote:

"It is like a race. One way is to get rid of all those that can run faster than us, so that we are the only ones running. Another way is set rules to disallow others from running faster than us, so that we can win. This are ways to win, but the win is not real. In the global marketplace, we cannot prevent others from running, nor can we set rules to prevent others from running."

The turd Gan Kim Yong's statement actually makes sense, but that is just bad analogy. I prefer another analogy, that the economy is more like a dragon boat race. In our economy, lighter rowers are replacing less stronger workers on the boat. Remember, lighter does not mean better, some are complete duds. The stronger rowers in the original team may have to row harder if many of these new lighter rowers are duds. You can only hope the that lighter rowers become stronger over time.

Even if this is feasible, what do you do with displaced rowers? Your policies have not shown to be particularly effective at integrating displaced workers back into the economy. In fact, it appears to be aggravating structural unemployment in Singapore. 

Here is an abstract thinker, possibly even competent. The minister is convinced of the benefits of competition at the workplace and the righteousness of his policies. He has conveniently failed to notice and deal with the problems and other structural issues that unbridled competition will bring about. 

Mr Gan, don't be daft. Instead of training average rowers to row better in the global economic race, you decide its better to throw them off the boat and let them swim back to shore. I don't mind if you send the FTs packing, but the fact that significant number of Singaporeans are affected should tell you your policies, at best, are subject to poor implementation and misaligned civil service incentives. 

Would more GDP bonuses for your ministry help make it better, Mr Minister sir?

Saturday 30 April - Change in government is not a calamity; Archbishop and Banking Tycoon weigh in

Rally Roundup

- PAP: "Perfect balance" with Chinese PM, Indian President, Malay Speaker; WP: Co-drivers do not fight for the wheel; NSP: Government should be compassionate; SDP: Immigration policy lambasted; SPP: Chiam's emotional homecoming at Potong Pasir; RP: JBJ's democratic legacy (Satay Club)

- "Live updates for Tonight's rallies: Saturday 30th April" (The Online Citizen)

Having the last say:

- "Imagining Electoral Calamity": Alex Au thinks an election upset is unlikely for the incumbents, and explains why in the event that happens, things are not so bad. 1) The current PAP government has just retired several former ministers, therefore should be confident of appointing from within the current pool of candidates, 2) The civil service will stay, and likely provide better solutions, 3) Fleeing FDI and jobs is a simplistic view, as investment decisions are seldom made solely based on a monopoly of political power, 4) Losing out on upgrading is not a big deal as voters will get to decide again in 5 years, furthermore it is a flawed policy because it is taxpayers money. Most importantly the psychology of the PAP and other regulated corporate entities will experience a positive change in mindset that will ultimately benefit all Singaporeans. (Yawning Bread)

- "What the PAP doesn't want you to know": Another commentary from a blogger, chips in on the PAP losing power after polling day. 1) It is likely PAP will still remain in Singapore politics, 2) It is unlikely one opposition party will dominate the parliament, 3) Claim that opposition parties lack quality candidate is fallacious, as the opposition lineup is fairly strong this time round, and specialized expertise can be hired by the government in power, 4) Singapore will continue as usual without the PAP, 5) Foreign investments will not pull out of Singapore overnight because the PAP loses the elections, 6) "Skeletons in the closets" will be uncovered from a change in government. (Brian Bummers)

- "Archbishop Nicholas Chia's Pastoral Letter for 2011 General Elections": The Archbishop weighs in on the General Elections, urging all Catholics to use their free vote to further the common good while remaining true to Christian values, ensuring "the poor, the elderly and the marginalized in our society are cared for". (Catholic News)

- When asked about his opinion on the coming elections, Chairman of UOB Wee Cho Yaw said that there are many exceptional candidates this election. A stable, pro-business is most important to (his business), and that has been the cornerstone of Singapore's success. "Whatever the results of the elections, it will not significantly affect Singapore's business environment." (Lianhe Zaobao)