TR EMERITUS

Written by Our Correspondent The incorrigible spin doctor of the PAP - Chua Mui Hoong has come up with another audacious spin to pull a wool over the unsuspecting eyes of Singaporeans to send off her political masters on a high before the year ends. A former intelligence officer with the Singapore Internal Security Department together with her elder sister Chua Lee Hoong, both are now "senior writers" of the Straits Times. In a lengthly article published today, Chua Mui Hoong tried to convince Singaporeans why 2009 has nudged Singapore further on "liberalization". She highlighted the key "changes" to the electoral system introduced by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong: "raising the minimum number of opposition Members of Parliament from three to nine through the Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) scheme; increasing the minimum number of single-seat wards from eight to 12; lowering the average size of Group Representation Constituencies (GRCs); and introducing a no-campaigning 'cool-off' day on the eve of polling day." "Also noteworthy this year was the decision to include estates in opposition wards Hougang and Potong Pasir in the multi-billion dollar lift upgrading scheme, to fit older HDB blocks with lifts that stop at every floor," she added. Ms Chua praised PM Lee for introducing "small tweaks" that shift the political landscape towards more "openness and diversity" and to encourage "participatory politics" by rewarding even failed opposition candidates with easier access to Parliament. Singaporeans should not be too happy yet. These "tweaks" are nothing more than a ploy to appease the rising demand from the ground for more opposition in Parliament and only serve to further entrench the PAP in power. As Ms Chua acknowledged herself, they "are tactical, political moves that aim to satisfy voters' desire for more checks and balances, without really risking the People's Action Party's (PAP's) grip on power." No political party will ever bother to listen to the people if is grip on power is never threatened. Having additional token number of non-PAP MPs in this case does nothing to "liberalize" the political landscape as the PAP is still assured of its two-third majority in Parliament to ramp unpopular policies down the throats of Singaporeans. Furthermore, the changes may backfire on the opposition as voters will not be less inclined to vote for them since they can now enter parliament as a "best loser". If PM Lee is serious about shifting Singapore's landscape towards greater "openness and diversity", it should scape the unfair rules and laws which tilt the playing field towards the PAP: appoint an independent Elections Commission, limit the number of GRCs to less than half of the total number of seats, announce the electoral boundaries and polling date at least half a year in advance, increase the duration of the campaign period, decouple SPH and Mediacorp from the PAP and refrain from using frivolous defamation lawsuits to cripple its opponents. Far from being "liberalizing", 2009 is a "regressive" year for Singapore which sees the political and civil rights of Singaporeans taking a huge step back with the introduction of the Public Order Act to outlaw even a solo protest, the introduction of the "cooling-off" day to give the PAP an unfair advantage on the eve of polling day and the failure of the PAP to account to Singaporeans the losses suffered by Temasek and GIC. Singaporeans must stop depending on the PAP to "liberalize" the political landscape. It's time to we give them a hand by booting them out of office come GE 2010.  Read More →

By Dingle Ting “Uniquely Singapore” is the catch phrase often used to describe Singapore. It holds true in many ways.   Here are some “uniquely Singapore” moments.   Singaporean children go to school and recite the national pledge daily. They place their fists over their hearts and resolve to “build a democratic society” every single day.   Yet for the past 40 years where Singaporean children have been solemnly declaring to “build a democratic society” their country continues as a non-functioning democracy or hybrid regime as named by the Economist. The Singapore government, despite solemnly taking the same pledge every National Day, says that functioning democracy like those in countries such as the UK, North America, Europe, Oceania is dangerous and continues to denies its citizens such democracy. Singapore’s national pledge has hardly any significance in the real world.   This reminds me of the many African countries, like Congo, that call themselves “Democratic Republics”. Or the North Korean state that calls itself “Democratic People's Republic of Korea”. Despite what they openly call themselves, in reality, they are really not a democracy at all.   Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, what a joke. At least the Chinese are honest, they openly say they are communists and are ruled by one party.   In democratic countries, citizens talk openly about politics. Friends gather at cafes to talk about politics. They discuss policies made by the government. People actively canvass for support towards their causes. If they have the free time, they can stand at a street handing out flyers to promote their cause. They join political parties and express their views peacefully.   Political parties are a fundamental part of every democratic society. In functioning democracies, people are encouraged to explore political views, to join political parties and to speak up against injustice. For only then, will society progress. Only with such a thinking populace in place, can economic wealth, freedom and justice last through generations.   In Singapore, people who join political parties other than the ruling one are often stigmatized. This is rather common. You join the SDP or DAP or whatever political parties you have in Singapore and realize some of your friends no longer answer your phone calls. Some of your neighbors no longer speak to you and pretend not to know you when you say “hi”. Your parents are extremely worried about you joining a political party and ask you “Have you got nothing better to do? Why look for trouble?”   In the past 3 elections in Singapore, walkovers have always hovered around 50% of the total contested seats. This means that around 50% of the seats are uncontested as no one even dares or bothers to compete for them. The people in those areas do not even have to vote as the ruling party has already won these seats, even before election day. Therefore, it wouldn’t be very wrong to say that the ruling party has more or less won the election even before the election itself.   These would be unfathomable for someone in the UK or any democratic country. Politics is a much encouraged and righteous affair in all free countries of the world. Yet in the HDB flats of Singapore, it is quite frequently associated with “trouble”.   In the UK or any other free country, citizens jump at the chance to speak up. Even the youths are always involved in politics. The youths of the UK are now campaigning for the government to lower the voting age to 16. There is a “youth parliament” where youths make believe they are MPs. They form parties and debate policies. The “House of Commons” (UK parliament) has even allowed these youth to use the real parliament for their mock debates.   A closer look at Singapore would easily shed some light as to why quite a few Singaporeans are afraid to take part in politics.   In Singapore, permits are required to speak in public and have an assembly of more than 5 people. Libel laws in Singapore are also interpreted in a manner unlike those in other functioning democracies.   Opposition party members like Dr Chee Soon Juan and his associates who hold peaceful protests are jailed and fined. When they stand on the streets to hand out flyers to promote their cause, they are prosecuted and fined too. When they express their views verbally, they are sued for libel for a single “wrong” sentence made. They are then fined hundreds of thousands of dollars and bankrupted if they fail to pay up. As bankrupts, they cannot run for parliament or leave the country at will.   How are opposition parties ever going to have a meaningful campaign if they cannot even go out in public to canvass for support? How can a functioning democracy ever take place in such an environment?   The UN declaration of human rights states that everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. Obviously that is not the case in unique Singapore.   For all his misfortunes, you can actually say that Dr Chee is relatively lucky. Unlike past politicians such as Chia Thye Poh, Lim Hock Siew, Said Zahari, or many others, he was not jailed for over a decade, without trial. The Singapore government claims these men were communists that is why they were jailed for a decade, or in Chia’s case, two decades without trial.   Ironically, Singapore is now very friendly with China, the biggest communist country in the world. Singapore are one of the only three countries who receive 15 days visa free travel to China. The streets of Singapore are filled with plenty of immigrants from China, many of them, who having lived in a Communist country their whole life, have communist views too. Some of them may even be from the CCP.   Due to the environment they live in, many Singaporeans are afraid to take part in politics and opposition party members find it rather impossible to conduct a meaningful campaign. After all, how do you have a meaningful campaign when everyone is afraid to join your party, when you cannot gather in public to spread your views? When unusual libel laws are in place where one wrong sentence can bankrupt you?   Singaporean men are forced to serve two years of conscription along with 20 years of reservist duties. They are told that their sacrifice will allow them to live as free men.   Yet every night that they go back home, many of them live in fear. They shudder at the thought of joining a political party and expressing their political views in their own country. What irony.   The teenage vandal is lashed at till permanent scars are left on his buttocks and then thrown in jail for 6 months for his youthful mistake of spray painting graffiti on a wall.   While dictators such as “Thein Sein” who subverted the will of democracy has a flower named after him by Singapore (Dendrobium Thein Sein). He then enjoys five stars treatment courtesy of the Singapore government.   I guess the lesson learnt is this – You teenage chav. Instead of spray painting walls, renounce your Singapore citizenship, take up a Myanmese one, join their army, become a general, be part of a group of people who carry out torture and even murder, then come back to Singapore. They will name a flower in honor of you and you can dine in fine wine.   Everyday in Singapore, people who overstay their work visas by 3 months are sentenced to lashing of their buttocks where permanent scars are left behind. Drug traffickers are sentenced to hang. Cheats are sentenced to unbelievably long years behind bars. Justice, Singapore style.   In the UK or most other functioning democracies, the British judge and public would shake their heads at such manifestly excessive sentences. The punishments do not fit the crime at all. In Singapore, these are ruled as appropriate every single day. Just compare the punishments in Singapore against those in the US, UK or even Serbia or Poland and you will see how ridiculous they are.   Similarly, the Singapore gaols says they are “humane” and “rehabilitative”. Yet every day, it carries out hanging of drug mules, lashes teenage vandals and foreigners who overstay their work visas.    In Britain, the prisoner places his shoes under his bed before watching TV to pass his time.   In Singapore, the prisoner sleeps on hard concrete so he cannot place his slippers underneath. There is also no TV for him to watch daily. Many of them just stare at the walls for the 23 hours daily till the paint peels. Quite a number of them develop mental illnesses due to the overly harsh regime.   Reasonably speaking, such treatments are inhumane mentally and physically.   But in Singapore, it is humane because they say so. It is also alright to hand out unbelievably harsh sentences, to fine and jail people for peaceful assembly, to bankrupt politicians for making one wrong sentence, because the they, the higher ups in Singapore, say so. It is also acceptable to name flowers in honor of human right abusers such as “Thein Sein”. Never mind what the international norms or standards are.   When you point out the fact that Singapore ranks as a “hybrid regime” in the Democracy Index, ranks 144th in the world for press freedom, ranks 43 out of 45 in the privacy index, is the country with the highest number of executions per capita, the government will come out with all kinds of excuses to pull the wool over your eyes, ranging from we are Asians to these foreigners are jealous and are out to sabotage us.   Think about it, why in the world would the UK or US or any other functioning democracy be jealous of Singapore? The average guy in the UK or US wouldn’t even want to live in Singapore for extended periods of time unless there are compelling reasons to do so. Singapore is merely a tiny island half a world away, it would be absurd to say Singapore is a threat to the biggest economies of the world. The UK spends millions of dollars in sending aid to Africa every year alone. These countries are merely doing their part in speaking up for democracy, human rights and justice.   Thank god Obama was not born a Singaporean. If so, he could have spent long periods behind bars for his youthful heavy drug use. If the amount of drugs on him was large enough, he might even be hanged for drug trafficking. The same goes for Jacqui Smith and David Cameron of the UK. They could all be ex convicts, unable to find a job, sweeping the floors of Ang Mo Kio, had they been Singaporeans.   Unbelievable.    But hey, they don’t call it “Uniquely Singapore” for nothing, do they?   Ding Ting. British citizen in London.  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent According to political analysts, as many as 25 MPs may be asked to step down in the next general election to make way for new candidates. Eugene Tan, a law professor from Singapore Management University said the percentage of MPs who retired in past elections is about 25 per cent and he believed the figure may even be as high as 30 per cent in the next election. However, vocal backbencher MPs are likely to be retained in his opinion as "the ruling party wants to let Singaporeans know that some PAP MPs are able to perform better than opposition MPs in scrutinizing and criticizing its policies." PAP MPs currently hold 82 out of 84 seats in the Singapore parliament. The other two non-PAP MPs are Mr Chiam See Tong from Potong Pasir and Mr Low Thia Kiang from Hougang. Singapore has been ruled continuously for 50 years since 1959 by the ruling PAP whose leaders have advocated a "one-party" government as one which is "ideal" for Singapore. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that Singapore has too few talents to form a two-party system like the United States. Law Minister Shanmugam told an American audience lately that Singapore's "unique" system has worked for it over the years and is a key factor in its economic success. Due to increasing pressure from the ground to liberalize the political landscape, PM Lee was pressurized to announce a series of "reforms" to increase the number of non-PAP seats in parliament to 18. They will be filled by 9 "best losers" in the elections as NCMPs. The other 9 seats are reserved for NMPs who do not represent any constituency. Though there appears to be an increase in the number of "opposition" MPs in parliament, they are still short of the number needed to deny the PAP its traditional two-thirds majority which enables it to pass bills and legislation freely and easily without any proper debate or consultation wtih the people. As the NCMPs and NMPs do not have a grassroots support base of their own, they are unable to build a credible alternative party to provide genuine political competition to the PAP. Despite constantly exhorting Singaporeans to compete with foreigners, the PAP is unwilling to reform the entire system to allow other parties to compete with them on a level playing field. With the next election likely to be called sometime next year, the PAP will begin to retire some of its MPs, but some remain "irreplaceable". It is not known if its geriatrician leader MM Lee Kuan Yew will still contest in the next general election. He will be 87 years old next year. By his own admission, Lee told a Japanese audience lately that he is "not doing much work except doing forecasting", yet he appears in the news more frequently than his son the Prime Minister. Which PAP MP do you wish to see step down in the next GE? Post your thoughts here and share with our readers!  Read More →