Reading the Straits Times Forum have been really sad. It only serves to reinforce my belief that the ST is utterly biased. No, it's not only that. It's disgustingly biased. In the past, even with the notion and belief that the ST is biased, I still manage to convince myself that there's some truth the the reported news and forum entries. But reading today's edition, it is simply disappointing. The comments were as good as not even articulating anything. And just look at the coverage of the PAP against the opposition. The disparity in the comments, the length of the articles were openly biased. Ok I should not generalise, but an average citizen like me is not concerned with what the PAP promise. After all, I've seen enough empty promises from the ruling party. MP's that know people concern? How is that possible if I never even seen and talked to my MP in the last 15 years? And the supposedly meet-the-people's session that apparently ended up becoming a meet-the-secretary session. I really can't take it that tax payers money (and a lot of it) is going to these people. But I shall not completely discredit my MP of 15 years. Indeed, he has done a decent job in cleaning up the estate (socially, not literally) and making it nicer, though infrastructure-wise, almost nothing has been done. It doesn't mean that a private estate don't need these upgrading plans and that we are free of concerns. It's is just that we have different issues of concern, of which, I'm sure that my MP doesn't know a thing about. This is reflected very well in the greatly reduced support of the current MP over the years. From >80% when he took his first term, to barely 60% the last election. The great slip in votes.. a sign of incapability and lost of trust? Perhaps.
And then came this election. Now, the new PAP candidate is a political veteran. Veteran? How can you consider yourself veteran when you've always been hiding behind the light of an anchoring minister in a GRC? And worst of all, you live in the other end of Singapore for almost your entire life. What do you know about this constituency. The election is just in a week's time and I don't even know who you are or what you look like. To be honest, I've seen the WP's candidate more times and held longer conversations with them in the last week than I have with the PAP in the last 22 years of my life. I really cannot accept an MP that doesn't even live in this SMC.
Ok, then let me bring up an issue that the PAP has been slamming the opposition since independence. Qualifications. Today, when I look at the WP's candidates qualifications, I was surprisingly impressed. All are high qualified professionals, mostly from the private sector. And take a look a the PAP candidate. An average public servant. What a let down. Now the PAP puts it that qualifications are not the only key to Singapore's political success. Can you sense the irony? In the past, the PAP put down the opposition because of their qualifications. But today, when they realise that their candidates' qualifications are not as good as their counterparts, they twist their argument. Such dictatorship on criteria and arguments. This just doesn't make sense.
Show this picture to any foreign media and I'm sure the first thing they would relate it to is to that of the mass uprising of the people in Egypt as well as many other countries in the Arab world. Lets just make a visual comparison with a picture I posted not long ago about the Egypt mass protests.
Notice the great similarity? Looking at pictures of the WP rally in Hougang. And the NSP's rally in Marine Parade. One word sums it up. Impressive. On the other hand, reading about and watching PAP's rallies, it's hard to believe that this is the standard of a ruling party of 52 years. This is in stark contrast to not only the opposition, but also with Minister Mentor's Lee Kuan Yew's rally speeches. Even at this year's GE, LKY's walkover speech was short, but undoubtedly impactful. That is the characteristics of a real political veteran. No matter how some Singaporeans and the International Community criticize LKY for being ruthless and domineering. I respect the gentleman. He gave Singaporeans doses of bitter medicine that's essential for development. He had great vision. He introduced policies that are unpopular but now, I'm sure many of us are enjoying the fruits of his labour. But being so domineering and ruthless is not something that anyone can do. Especially many of the ministers of the PAP today. One would require true capability to deliver. Singaporeans are understanding people. We can forgive our leaders and organisations for mistakes they make, but that's only if they've done enough to make up for it. Take the example of Temasek Holdings. Indeed, they lost quite a bit of taxpayers money. But ever wondered why Singaporeans are not that anal and harp on this issue to eternity? It's because we know of how much wealth they've helped generated over the years. But let us take a contrasting issue. The Mas Selamat case. First thing's first, a radical terrorist escaping from a Singaporean Prison? Unforgivable. Did the Home Affairs Minister take responsible for it? According to ST and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng himself, yes. And now the question is, how? How did he account for it? Some possibility that I can think of based on examples in other developed countries are: sincerely apologise to the people and take a huge pay cut, or sincerely apologise to the people and resign. Let me explain my rationale. For a sincere apology, it's a must. After all, the people trusted your capabilities and empowered you to manage the home affair issues. Has he done that? In my opinion, no. I don't feel the sincerity at all. Next, the pay cut. The people paid for your salaries, and since you have not done your job properly, shouldn't you draw a lower income? The government emphasized that they try to work as efficiently or more efficiently than the private sector. So let us draw some comparisons. In the private sector, if one does not perform, their performance bonus as well as year end bonus would be removed. So shouldn't that apply to ministers as well? Also, even within the public sector, teachers have their bonuses revoked too, if they fail to perform up to standard. So what is with the exception of ministers? In fact, Mr Wong Kan Seng got a promotion to Deputy Prime Minister and a pay rise instead! Justifiable? Ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous.
Next the issue on public housing. The current cost of public housing is really worrying me. about $300000 for a 3 room HDB? According to our National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan, this is considered affordable. He explained that a couple can afford this even with zero savings and that this would only take up 25% of their monthly income. Let me do an analysis. First, zero savings and yet you can afford a HDB flat. Sound really enticing and too god to be true right? True enough. Theoretically one can do that. But ever wondered what the repercussions are. Like the local radio station aptly puts it, Singaporeans only "hear the good things". Did anyone warn Singaporeans that the housing loan would be extended from 20 years to 20 years?! Oh my. 30 years. Let's say if I get married at 30, I would have to pay till I'm 60! And probably, I would never be able to afford a car and anything else luxury. As for the WP's policy to peg new home prices to the incomes of new homeowners, I don't see why it's "like raiding the reserves" as Mr Mah puts it. Anyway, with him saying that, it makes me wonder where all the reserves come from. And how a country can have a budget surplus almost every year. Giving the surpluses back to the people is a sin? Ouch. I really feel for the tax-payers. Also, Mr Mah also say that the WP's policy would deflate home prices and that "the government" (I don't get the constant interchangeable use of PAP and the government. Synonymous? I hope not) is trying to propose housing as not only a shelter over our heads, but also an asset. But how can that be an asset if the HDB flats that people desperately try to pay for, would return to the government after 99 years? So the effective value of the flat as an asset to Singaporeans = 99 - 30 (loan repayment) = 69 years? That's not even longer that an average lifespan of a Singaporean! Also, 25% of income is true. But ever wondered how many % of income an average citizen needs to put aside to support the family's daily expenses? Simply ask your parents and the answer is clear. 25% is quite a huge percentage for an average family. Probably the ministers don't know as well, coz most of them are very well to do (duh. Just look at their incomes), and national statistics figures don't really give a clear representation of population economic trends and spread, mainly due to the large inequality gap between the rich and the poor here. For example, the GDP per capita here is about $3000/month. Sounds good? But statistics fail to show that actually, if we take a sample of the population, the poor may only be earning $1000/month, while the rich are earning $5000 or more.
Sometimes, the things the ministers say really make me wonder if Singaporeans are choosing the right leaders. Many policies require much more scrutiny from not only the MP's, but also the people. But then again, MP's are supposed to represent the people of their constituency. Then why is it that there are still so many disgruntled Singaporeans? Bitter medicine as the PAP puts it? Not by a long shot. Trying to use the same reason that Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew used just after independence, but minus the capability?
But at the end of the day, I respect what the PAP has done for Singapore since independence. It's amazing that they (I will use PAP and government here synonymously here because, indeed, they have been the government) developed Singapore to the vibrant and cosmopolitan city-state that she is today. To be honest, I am immensely proud to be a Singaporean. Whenever I go abroad, I never fail to feel ever so proud to tell others that I'm a Singaporean and introduce others to Singapore. In general, the Singaporean leaders are doing a good job. But is "good" good enough? If we never try to take a leap of faith and test the opposition, we would never know what we could potentially be missing out on. Like when PAP was still the opposition party to the Barisan Nasional just after Singapore's independence. People chose to gave PAP a chance, and it turned out to be a pretty wise choice. So if people back then didn't take a leap of faith and give a new and inexperienced political party a chance, what would we be missing out on today?
No comments:
Post a Comment