TR EMERITUS

Since Independence, our country has been obsessed with economic growth. That is understandable given that we were a developing economy and people and capital were not fully mobilized. However, we are now a developed economy and a first world country. We reached full employment long ago and even had to bring in foreigners to supplement the labour force. At this juncture, there is no need to continue to chase growth for growth’s sake, which we have been doing by pouring labour and capital into the economy. This is simply not sustainable because there is a physical limit to such a form of expansion. Instead, what we should do is shift our focus from material growth to intrinsic growth. Abraham Maslow captured the natural progression of people and society best with his Hierarchy of Needs. We start with basic needs like shelter, food, employment and security. Having achieved that, we move on to higher order needs like love, a sense of connection, respect, self-esteem and finally to self-actualization, which is being the best that one can be. As an advanced country, we should be moving on to higher order goals instead of trying to steal other people’s lunch. It makes no sense to exploit cheap foreign workers and to replace the local PMET with a hungrier foreigner, for growth. It makes no sense to fill the country to the brim with people, for growth. Rather, we should be developing a society where people are respected, dignified and trying to be the best that they can be. That way, economic growth will come in tandem with human growth, which is sustainable. However, the PAP government has a proclivity to control the people via indoctrination, intimidation, co-option and economic dependency. How then is the people to grow? Since it’s election time and we are deliberating our future we would do well to ask the PAP what is the long term plan for our country. Hope it is not more of the same.   Foong Swee Fong      Read More →

Your Vote is SECRET - Don't be afraid or listen to rumours During the last general elections (2011) I was at the takeout counter of an NTUC supermarket, when I overheard 1 counter staff telling her newer colleague - 'Oh now you work for NTUC, you must vote PAP because you're considered a Govt worker!!' This brings me back to 1970s and 1980s when people were really afraid that if they were to vote someone else other than PAP, they would be in trouble. Many civil servants had this impression that they had to vote accordingly because the votes could be traced. Heck even NTUC taxi drivers thought they had to vote PAP. Thankfully that number has grown smaller but unfortunately there are still some who have this fear. This includes those on social welfare and people working in the Civil Service or Stat Boards. I believe all of us have heard tales of how someone voted opposition, then somehow or rather they didn't get a particular job or government grant, even worse - got retrenched. I don't know how they managed to put 1 +1 = 3. Even in the last elections I had to convince a friend who was afraid of voting opposition, citing the example of a mutual friend's father who voted opposition in 2006 and some bad luck - applications wise, struck. It took some convincing before he accepted that the 2 were not related and it's a mere coincidence. Therefore I think it wise to clear these doubts once and for all, so that you can cast your vote without fear. Because I believe there's still a small percentage, I'm estimating at around 5% but it may closer to 10%, who through ignorance and by listening to rumours and supposition, are unable to vote without fear. But before I start I urge all of you to read Alex Au's article - 'Counting Agent Me,' where he explains the procedure involving vote counts and how transparent it is, with no doubts on the impartiality of election officials. In fact, he would go on to explain that the Assistant Returning Officer (ARO) at the counting centre would always try to find the voter's intention, if say they did not mark the ballot paper properly. Only when there was clear doubt would they declare a ballot paper void. That's counting - I wanna focus on voting. 1. Your name on the Register is available to contesting parties Some of you wonder how the candidates (especially PAP) knows your name. Moreover it is called out when you're presented with the ballot paper in the presence of the PAP (and opposition) polling agent who marks it out in his form. There is nothing to fear about this - your name on the list of eligible voters in that district (or constituency) is no secret. It's in the Register of Electors and all parties contesting can request for a set of these. In fact in GE 2011, some voters received a 'postcard like' pamphlet from the PAP addressed to them in the mail. It had the photo of the PAP candidate in the form of a 'ballot' with a 'X' marked against it. Some people became fearful because they assumed that the PAP by sending this 'postcard' had their details and this was a 'warning/reminder' to vote PAP. There is absolutely nothing to this. Each party I believe is allowed to spend around $3 on each voter. So what the PAP did was to look at the registered address of each voter, which is available and then send them this 'postcard,' which is just like any other election pamphlet you'll receive, but only this had your name/address on it. It probably costs them around 70-80 cents to produce and mail this in bulk.Because they are the largest and wealthiest party they can afford to use this 'gimmick,' that's all. But similarly any other party can do likewise - send you a letter with your name and ask you to vote for them. 2. All voting/counting/sealing/safekeeping and destroying of ballot papers are done in the presence of all parties Before I go to the voting process, I want you to bear in mind that any action relating to voting, the calling/crossing out of your name, the sealing and opening of ballot boxes, the closing and sealing again of ballots boxes, the counting of ballots and the safekeeping of votes after the count, even the destruction (after 6 months) is done in the presence of all candidates and parties. It must be done in the open at the voting and counting centre. You can ask any candidate to confirm this. Each candidate is allowed a number of polling agents and I believe 1 counting agent (do check with Alex Au). These agents (or the candidate himself) will be allowed in the voting centre before the polls start at 8am. This is what is done: 1) The ballot boxes are presented and opened in their presence to confirm it's empty. 2) It is then sealed and they are invited to append their signatures on the seal. 3) It's placed at the polling booth. 4) The process is repeated every time a new ballot box is placed/presented. When the boxes are full or when voting is over, it is closed in their presence and again signatures are invited. It's then conveyed to the counting centre. Before the counting can begin, again the candidates and their counting agents will be asked to check the seals before it is opened. The counting is done in their presence. When the count is over (including a recount), the ballots are placed in the boxes again together with any used stubs or other related material. It's again sealed and then kept at the Supreme Court vault for a period of 6 months. If there's no challenge (none so far in our history), the boxes will taken out from the vault again, the parties will be invited to witness this and check the seals once more. It's then transported to Tuas for incineration. As you can see, at no time are the ballot papers cast, kept or hidden from view, where someone or some enforcement agency like the Police, CPIB or ISD can gain access secretly. There's a strict process to ensure that any opening and closing of the ballot boxes must have a seal at all times or the seals removed after inspection to ensure no tampering. And all contesting parties will be notified of this in advance so they can come and bear witness. 3. Serial numbers This is the major cause for concern with some people - serial numbers on ballot papers. However there's a good reason for this. Each voter in each district is given a unique serial number. This is to ensure that there's no double or 'phantom votes.' Don't you think it's better this way- where all parties can know the total number of eligible voters and the number who actually voted? Plus even you can be sure that your vote belongs only to you - no one can use a fake ID to cast a vote in your name. So while probably the parties will know that you were issued with a ballot and cast your vote, only you will know what choice you made. If there were no serial numbers, it might be easier for a party to stuff ballots in. Say there are 20,000 eligible voters in constituency A. But only 18,700 turned up, leaving a shortfall of 1300 votes. It might be easier for someone (or party) to stuff another 1200 votes, since the total number will remain below 20,000. No one might suspect that this was done because no one knows who actually voted and who didn't. With serial numbers we can separate actual voters from absentees. Your vote is secret - you can tell others how you voted if you want to, but no one can demand to know how you voted. When you are given a ballot paper - it's empty save for the candidates name and their party logos with a serial number on the reverse. You mark your 'X' - you can also use a tick or any other symbol or word to show your choice, but it's better to use a cross or a tick. And then drop it into the sealed box. However you should not write your name on the ballot paper - voting is secret and any indication of your identity will render that ballot void. (Check Alex's article.) And there you have it - you were given your ballot paper after the procedure mentioned in paragraph 1 above. You then cast your vote and it will follow the sealing and counting procedure in paragraph 2. How is your choice known? The only known fact is that you're eligible to vote and that you did cast your ballot. What's in it - only you will know. 4. Can the system be compromised? Again no. When the ballots are opened for counting they are mixed and jumbled up. Your vote will be together with a few other thousand. All will have serial numbers of course, but no one knows to whom they belong. 5. Then how come the PAP knows how my precinct voted? Well in a slightly sneaky move, the government introduced a method of counting. In any constituency, there will be a few voting centres each covering a precinct. Usually it's around 10 blocks - around 5000 to 8000 voters thereabouts. When the ballot boxes are brought to the counting centre - they are of course marked with numbers and words like A2, B3, C4 etc. These are all the different precincts - so maybe precinct A had 3 boxes - A1 to A3. And so it goes. What they do is count these precincts separately - so in your constituency there are 3 precincts, each precinct is counted separately before the total votes in each are tallied up to give the final full figure for that constituency. So take Potong Pasir, they have like 3 (or 4) precincts - Blks 101-148 Potong Pasir, Sennett estate (possibly Woodleigh) and of course the 8 blocks in Lor 8 Toa Payoh. So both Lina Chiam (SPP) and Sitoh Yipin (PAP) will know how each of these precincts voted in total - not each individual's vote. Say in Lor 8, Lina got 1900 of the total 3000 votes in that precinct, Sitoh 1000 and 100 were rejected votes. This data might help the opposition know where their support lies, but to the PAP it's a 'gold-mine.' They will know where they are weak, comparing each election to the previous. This has led to allegations of an unlevelled playing field, because frequently you see the electoral boundaries redrawn - Gombak, Anson, Nee Soon Central, Braddell Heights to name a few, saw these precincts even constituencies absorbed or merged with others, where of course the PAP is stronger. And the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee is virtually a law unto itself - headed by the PM's private secretary and even receiving 'guidance' from him. Potong Pasir I believe, best exemplifies this - in the last polls, Lina lost by a mere 114 votes. I believe the addition of new condos at Woodleigh Park may have played a crucial part in this. Lor 8 Toa Payoh is usually a Chiam stronghold - Sennett estate - PAP, with the 148 blocks in Potong Pasir usually leaning Chiam's way - maybe 55-60% in a good year, but in a close year like 2011, it may be closer to 50%, hence any new votes or voters can have a telling effect and produce such a cliff-hanger. 6. Can my vote ever be checked? What happens if there's a phantom or fake voter? The answer is yes. 'There - surely this confirms our suspicions,' these doubters will say. How can be secret if my vote can be checked and scrutinised? If anyone or party has evidence that someone else voted in your name using either your NRIC or a fake one, or a list of 'phantom voters' exists. Then and then only, can your vote via the serial number be checked. But this has a very stringent procedure. Don't confuse this with 'spoilt or rejected votes.' This cannot be overturned by law. At the counting centre if an election official comes a cross a vote that isn't clear or doubtful, he notifies the ARO, who will invite the 2 counting agents from the contesting parties over. He will examine the vote and ask them if they have any objections as to why the vote shouldn't be declared void. (Of course blank no need to say or 2 crosses in each box). Other markings like say someone drew a flower next to Lina Chiam's name and nothing else, he has to decide if this is considered a valid vote or not. After listening to both sides, if he makes the decision to declare it void - it cannot be overturned. Not even by the Court. And now to the issue of fake voters - say you find somebody voted in your name, when you turn up to vote, the officials say sorry - your name already crossed out - meaning ballot paper already issued. Then it gets interesting - you or the official's will make a police report.. A Special Election Court will be convened headed by a Supreme Court Judge. Only this Special Judge can order the box containing your vote be taken out of the vault and inspected. So then they have to go find that serial number given to your name and find this 'fake vote.' If there are a lot of such things that can effect the result, the Judge can declare the votes null and void and order a re-contest. Similarly if any party finds anything suspicious they can lodge a report and the Judge will hear arguments and rule accordingly. Only if there's a need to verify votes to voters - and that's a big IF, can it ever be made known to anyone as to how you voted. But of course this has to do with electoral fraud. Cannot anyhow hantam. And thus far since independence there's never been a case where an Election Judge was ordered by the President to investigate claims of fraud or fake voters. Not one opposition party has made any such reports. And if there ever will be, finding out each individual vote must be first deemed necessary for such a scrutiny to be made. Say like in Potong Pasir, there was some discrepancy in the final result and a report was lodged and the Court heard the matter. It might not straightaway mean an inspection of each individual's vote. The Judge could rule the counting process flawed and order a recount. He could after examining the evidence decide that the result is void and fresh elections called. In such cases, there's no need to inspect each individual's vote or tie each ballot paper to each voter through the serial numbers. Conclusion So you can see that your vote is pretty much very safe and secret. Nobody will know how you voted unless you tell them - which of course you can. There's no way to determine or find out how you voted except in the most pressing and compelling of cases - it's huge process as mentioned above and never once has such a situation arisen. Which brings me to the most obvious conclusion - why doesn't the Govt just come out and explain all of this and assure everyone that your vote is safe and secret? Why don't they just admit that they have no means of checking your vote? Very simple - the PAP is not dumb, they are past masters of behaving in such way to ensure their votes remain with them. From GRCs, Town Councils, high deposits and even now - a new tactic of making this a municipal election. They will never do anything to jeopardise their votes. Because if they came out and gave this assurance and explained the whole procedure in detail, it might just make those 5-10% who always voted in fear, to suddenly realise - 'hey we can happily vote without fear, no one will ever know if we voted opposition.' So they prefer to remain silent on this except for the basic minimum statement - your vote is secret and voting is compulsory. So please dispel any fears you may have and explain this to any friends or family members who are in fear of 'being discovered.' You are not obliged to vote for anybody even if you receive aid or work in any Govt agency, stat board or even if your company is a subsidiary of Temasek, SembCorp or NTUC. Your vote is secret and safe - vote wisely. Sir Nelspruit * The author used to blog at Anyhow Hantam.    Read More →

One of Donald Trump’s greatest moments came on 15 August 2017, when he was asked for his thoughts on the clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia between Neo-Nazis and normal people. The Donald proceed to stun the world by telling reporters that there were “very fine people on both sides.” The remark stunned the world because this was the leader of the nation that saved the world from the Nazis describing Nazis as very fine people, especially when its questionable if Nazis are people let alone very fine ones. However, in fairness to Donald Trump, his words were only shocking because of the context in which they were used in. Take out the context and Donald Trump’s words would actually be an ideal of what most civilized societies should be about – very fine people on both sides of any issue. The highlight of what a civilized democracy came int 2008 when John McCain defended and praised his opponent, Barak Obama as a “Decent man, whom I happen to disagree with.” [LINK] While McCain would lose the election, he has ended up winning in the hearts of people for doing the right things. Instead of trying to divide the nation, he united it and refused to go down the road of playing up to the fears and prejudices of the mob. Unfortunately, 2008 is something of a memory. From 2016 onwards, the world entered an age of wild populism, which centred on a wonderful concept of blaming your problems on people who cannot fight back. In the words of an American customer at the Bistrot, “There is no neutrality.” Singapore has seemingly escaped the most extreme forms of populism and in a world where calls for unthinking jingoism have become the norm, Singapore seems like an island of sanity in an insane world. However, having been around Singapore’s “arty” and “journo” types for a good portion of my functioning life, I would argue that it’s not exactly a case of Singapore avoiding wave of populism that is sweeping the world but more of a case of Singapore’s politicians being more subtle and clever about harnessing the raw emotions of the masses. The simplest tactic, is to label anyone who publicly questions the established way of doing things as “Anti-Singaporean.” As anyone who works who deals with any form of media will tell you, there is an art form to questioning the system in public without being labeled “Anti-Singaporean” or getting a nasty letter from a politicians solicitors and having your family’s dirty linen rolled in the mud and then washed out in public. The stories of the people who have tried to do it on a regular basis can be found at: [LINK] In the old days, it was a case of being sued into bankruptcy and facing a number of potential charges on a variety of laws. I’m old enough to remember the General Election of 1997, which was a particularly good one for the ruling party. They managed to reverse a trend of a declining share of the popular vote and won a mere 81 out of 83 seats available in parliament. While a lot of credit was given to generous upgrading programs in the heartland estates, another was to target an unknown politician from the Workers Party called Tang Liang Hong (No relation) by labeling him an “Anti-Christian Chinese Chauvinist.” The internet has made things more interesting. Online media sites like the Online Citizen and TRemeritus (as a matter of disclosure, my blog pieces are picked up by TRemeritus) have given a space for alternative voices. However, the ruling party has also found ways to deal with this. Why label anyone “Anti-Singaporean” when you can get someone else to do it for you. It’s especially effective when that person happens to be a Pink Blotchy – the Fawning Follower comes to mind. Unfortunately, Pink Blotchies have a tendency to be listened to, even if they’re speaking gibberish. As a friend of mine noted, otherwise intelligent people actually bought into the arguments of the Fawning Follower on why it was a sign of success to keep dark skinned Asians in cages (ooopps, I mean dormitories) and how the government supported the rule of law by a law on the statute books but not enforcing it. The Fawning Follower has been a particularly useful pawn in labeling people who disagree with the government as Anti-Singaporean or worse – Traitors. He’s labeled Kristin Han as having “a career in treachery” and his next favourite target is the play write Alfian Sa’at, whom he describes as symbolizing the egotistical rebellion of the no problem generation. While Kristin and Alfian have questioned things, neither have done anything that would count as “treachery” by any definition of the word. There is no record of either having said or done anything that called for violence in the streets or for a foreign nation to invade and so on. Neither have been picked up by the Internal Security Department, which would indicate that the government is well aware that the its “critics” are traitors or “anti-Singaporean” or dare I say “rebels” by any definition. Why do these things when someone else can do them for you? You stay above the fray and the Fawning Follower and his ilk do it for you. So, when the likes of Dr. Tan Meng Wu start talking about how ethnic minorities should be grateful that they can get jobs and send their kids to school, there’s no outrage at the underlying but blatantly racist tones. The trolls have laid the ground work for you and whatever prejudices people might have become justified because, well, a member of the ruling party said so in public and it was OK. Thankfully there are some signs of progress. I take my hat off to Professor Tommy, one of our most respected diplomats, who has stated that Singapore needs “loving critics.” Professor Koh has argued that as a strong society, Singapore needs to accept a diversity of views. Crushing the views of “loving critics” instead of accommodating them, can be bad. Mr. Wham spent years campaigning for migrant rights. He was labeled a trouble maker. Well, surprise – surprise, Covid-19 proved Mr. Wham right (1,000 cases a day, contrary to the Following Follower is not success). Had the authorities engaged Mr. Wham earlier, they may have found the problem much earlier and instead of being with the likes of Ukraine on the list of most infected nations, we might be closer to the likes of Hong Kong or Taiwan. If there’s anything that we need to move away from in this General Election, it is this automatic, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us” mentality. This isn’t about who wins the most seats but whether we can move away from “Me teacher, you student” (or as my mother says “me right, you wrong) mentality in politics and more towards the politics of “You’re a good man that I happen to disagree with.” There is a hope for this. Two of Singapore’s better leaders from different sides of political divide have chosen to step out of the ring in this election. Apparently, both men have stated their respect for each other. Here was the message that our former Prime Minister, Mr. Goh Chok Tong left on his Facebook on veteran opposition leader Low Thia Khiang: [LINK] Mr. Goh was labeled a “seat warmer” for our current Prime Minister. Despite having the pressures of the Old Lee above him and the Current Lee below him, Mr. Goh managed to do a few of his own things (As a long-term resident of Marine Parade, I have Mr. Goh to thank for getting MPs to try and beautify their estates. He was the first one to do so. As a beneficiary of Saudi-Relations and the Indian Business Community, I have to thank Mr. Goh for opening these markets up. – Lee Kuan Yew was quite open in his disdain for India after Indira Gandhi snubbed him). As such, I believe everyone contesting this general election should take note of his words and I think his final gift in politics is showing Singaporeans that it is possible to agree to disagree.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.      Read More →