TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent The Singapore Democratic Party now wants the PAP MP for Bukit Panjang Dr Teo Ho Pin to oppose the sale of Fajar market to Sheng Siong after its request to meet up with the management of the supermarket chain was rejected! The SDP had written to Ms Tan Ching Fern, head of Corporate Matters, asking to meet with the company's representatives. Its request was declined on the grounds that it is “inconvenient” to do so. SDP claimed that information about Sheng Siong's plans are sketchy and confusing because it is reported to have said that it will not rule out changing the operations of the wet markets after acquisition, including air-conditioning the facilities and turning them into 24-hour operations. Now that Sheng Siong has refused to meet, the SDP has reached the conclusion that the company cannot give the assurance that its acquisition of the wet markets will not lead to higher costs of food items and that it also cannot assure stallholders that their livelihoods will not be affected. SDP Chairman Gandhi Ambalam has written a third letter to Dr Teo Ho Pin inviting him to join SDP in opposing the sale. "We will be writing to the HDB to not approve the transaction and call on you to do the same. We hope that you will not equivocate on this matter, and state plainly and publicly that you oppose the takeover by Sheng Siong and will do all you can to stop the sale," Mr Gandhi added. Dr Teo had earlier called SDP to "do its homework" in response to its support for the Fajar stallholders to petition against the conversion of their wet market into an air-conditioned one. HDB had announced that the Fajar wet market, together with four others, do not fulfill the criteria for the conversion (as of now). It will decide by January next year whether to give the approval for the Sheng Siong purchase. SDP's plan to hold a public forum at Fajar itself to speak to the stallholders and residents directly was scuppered as its application for a permit to do so was rejected by the police. The police did not give any reasons for the rejection. Unlike previous incidents, SDP has chosen to exercise restraint and not proceed ahead with the forum.  Read More →

OPINION As we have seen from Part 2 of the article, Singapore has only one (or rather, half) pillar out of the seven pillars of democracy. Though Singapore conducts elections every five years, it lacks freedom of expression, political tolerance, rule of law and a civil society. Even the elections are far from free and fair. How are we going to build these pillars right from scratch in the face of all the obstacles the ruling party has placed in our paths in order to preserve and perpetuate its political hegemony? The opposition is weak, divided and powerless. There is literally no civil society to speak of. When there is one like Marauh, it prefers to fight for human rights in ASEAN rather than for Singaporeans. The Law Society is muzzled - it cannot utter a single word without permission from the ruling party. The police is empowered and authorized to harass and intimidate political activists into silence. The press is controlled by the ruling party. Most importantly, most Singaporeans remain ignorant, naive and apathetic about politics. Why is the ruling party able to exert so much control, influence and dominance over every aspect of life in Singapore? It is able to do so because of a submissive, ignorant and disunited citizenry. Had it tried its dirty tricks in Hong Kong, Taiwan or South Korea (all "Confucian" societies like Singapore), widespread protests will occur and it will probably be voted out at the next earliest opportunity. A politically aware, astute and active citizenry is the best form of defense against the excesses and abuses of power by all forms of dictatorships. As long the people are aware of their inherent rights as citizens, astute enough to differentiate the myths spun by the state media from the truths and actively participate in the socio-political life of their country, the regime will not dare to continue riding roughshod over us. Singapore is not North Korea. We are an open, advanced and developed first world country. The regime cannot continue to afford damaging its own credibility by using the police and the law to criminalize legitimate political activity and dissent. Therefore it can only do so quietly away from public view and scrutiny. Take for example the latest police rejection of SDP's application for a permit to speak at Fajar wet market without giving any valid reasons. Had this happened in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong or Taiwan, a public backlash will be triggered and the police chief may even be called to step down. Only in Singapore can the police stifle peaceful forms of political activity as such with impunity because first the media does not report on it and second, Singaporeans are too de-politicized to realize its significance. The most pillar of democracy we must build right now is freedom of information (expression). Once we break the stranglehold of information by the propagandist mouthpiece of the regime, they can no longer continue to hide the unsavory aspects of their hegemony from the people. It takes time to re-educate fellow Singaporeans who have been brainwashed by years of state propaganda, but time is on our side. The older generation of Singaporeans depend chiefly on the state media for their news. They can be easily deceived and misled by SPH spin doctors to believe that the ruling party is infallible and the opposition is led by crankpots, but the internet will become the main source of information for future generations of Singaporeans. The regime is able to control the mainstream media in Singapore through SPH which is always headed by a former PAP minister, but can it do so in a lawless world without borders? Can SPH control Temasek Review, Kent Ridge Common and Mr Brown at the same time? Even if it is able to accomplish this near impossible feat, can it prevent a Singaporekini from arising in the future? As the Malaysia political tsunami has adequately demonstrated, freedom of information is crucial to counter the pro-government mainstream media and to raise the political awareness of ordinary Malaysians. Former Malaysia Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi admitted that the new media played a pivotal role in the opposition's stunning success during the 2008 elections. It should come as no surprise that all but one of the 11 parliamentary seats in the federal territory of Kuala Lumpur were won by the opposition which also managed to win the wealthiest state of Selangor. The urban population depends on online news media like Malaysiakini for their news which enable them to see through the chicanery and lies of the mainstream media. Right now, the Temasek Review has exceeded the online readership of SPH's New Paper, but we are still far away from knocking the big players like CNA off their perch. Only when we are able to achieve it can we exert a real impact on the ground. That's where we need you our readers to continue lending your support to our cause. This is a battle of David versus Goliath. Without a substantial war chest, it will be foolhardy to challenge SPH. Though we are pretty small and unknown now, there are a few trends in our favor: 1. Due to political considerations, the state media will never be able to beat us in terms of in-depth political coverage and analysis. This is where we will constantly outwit and outfight them because no SPH editors will ever dare to write the truth without the fear of losing their jobs. 2. The entire world is moving towards greater political freedoms and pluralism. A one-party state with a Soviet-era media is out of sync with the modern world. Everywhere in Asia, dictatorships and dominant parties are falling out of power giving rise to multi-party democracies from Indonesia, South Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia and Japan. The young of tomorrow will be more politically aware, inclined and astute then present-day Singaporeans. The mainstream media will never be able to quench the intellectual thirst of these Singaporeans because it is created in the first place only to dish out state propaganda to preserve and perpetuate the hegemony of the regime. 3. The print media industry is in imminent decline in the face of constant onslaught from the new media with many established publications either forced to close down or wind down their operations, for instance FEER and Readers' Digest. SPH is only able to keep its readership because people have no alternatives to choose from. Once they have a credible online alternative to turn to, they will flock to it en masse and SPH papers will be forced either to change its editorial stance or risk being rendered obsolete altogether. Since the 2008 elections in Malaysia which saw the opposition winning five states, the mainstream media is forced to moderate its previously pro-government stance to salvage their declining readership to the extent that MCA President Ong Tee Keat lambasted The Star (owned by MCA) for turning into an opposition mouthpiece. Quality journalism deserves a price. Trained and experienced journalists must be paid at market rates. An internet newspaper needs constant support from its readers in order to continue growing and expanding. We cannot afford to stagnant at this crucial stage. We have to take off from here and become a full-fledged professional news site run not by amateurs bloggers but by trained journalists. It is impossible to change the unfair laws placed by the regime to cripple the opposition, rebuild and unite the fragmented opposition to become a force to be reckon with overnight or to stop the constant police harassment of political activists, but right here we have a good chance of building the most important pillar of democracy - freedom of information. Without a credible, strong and influential online newspaper to counter the daily lies, spins and propaganda of the mainstream media, we will never be able to free the minds of our fellow Singaporeans from the shackles that the ruling party has imposed on them for so long (yes, for far TOO LONG!) We will never be in a position to deny them their customary two-thirds majority in parliament for the next 50 years! Do you want another 50 years of one-party rule? So, please help us by clicking on the "donate" button on the right hand bar. We have already upgraded our server to a dedicated server and will be spending money to acquire a few other sites in the near future. We want to bring more socio-political sites to attain our readership, in fact the more the merrier. When our company is incorporated, we will employ professional journalists to manage the site on a full-time basis. We will have to pay market rates in order to secure their services and all these need money. Rome isn't built in a day. We cannot expect Singaporeans to wake up from their long slumber immediately. The road ahead is long, arduous and full of dangers, but time is on our side. With patience, perseverance and a bit of luck, we believe we will reach our eventual destination. It may take us one, two, three or ten years, it doesn't really matter. Your kind assistance and support will greatly help us to shorten the journey ahead.  Read More →

From our Correspondent Despite its lofty 23rd position out of 104 countries in the Legatum Prosperity Index, Singapore scored miserably in other sub-index rankings such as "democratic institutions" and "personal freedom". The 2009 Legatum Prosperity Index ranks 104 countries worldwide based on a definition of prosperity that combines economic growth together with measures of happiness and quality of life. It is based on statistical analysis of more than 40 years of data for more than 100 countries worldwide, produced and supervised by the Legatum Institute, with input from the research consultancy Oxford Analytica and a panel of respected academic advisors in the fields of economics, history, development, sociology, and political science. Below are selected sub-index rankings of Singapore:  Democratic Institutions - Ranked 86th: Singapore lacks democratic openness and successful electoral competition Despite the process of representative elections, the overall level of democracy in Singapore is low. The population is limited in its ability to participate in the political process and civil liberties are severely restricted. With designated executive elections, the regulation of the election process is low and there is a significant degree of autocracy. The judiciary is, however, independent and free from political interference. Singapore has a relatively stable political system that has been in place for 42 years, ranking the country 28th for regime stability.   Personal Freedom - Ranked 64th: In spite of low levels of personal freedoms, Singapore is extremely tolerant of ethnic and immigrant communities The major limitation on Singapore’s freedom is its low ranking for freedom of religion, movement, and choice, locating the country at 73rd. Whilst the ranking for individual freedom is low, 79% of the population remain satisfied with the level of choice and control they possess over their lives.* Over 80% of the population believe the country to be a desirable destination for ethnic minorities and immigrants.* (Gallup World Poll)   Social Capital - Ranked 76th: Singaporeans find support in family and friends, but find less social capital in group and community activities Singapore displays mixed levels of social capital. A high proportion of people believe friends to be important and 91% believe they can rely upon family and friends, ranking the country 28th, worldwide.* Whilst a high 61% reported having donated money, only 15% reported volunteering and 30% claimed having helped a stranger, ranking the country in the bottom third on these variables.* General trust in others is low at 15% of the population, and membership of groups and clubs is low, with 7% of the population involved in sports, 7% in arts, and just 1% in environmental activities.* [Source: 2009 Prosperity Index]   The disturbing thing is not the figures but the fact that 79 per cent of Singaporeans remain satisfied with the level of "freedom" they "enjoyed" under the authoritarian regime which shows that they are still largely ignorant of their political and civil rights. Political rights does not entail merely voting at the polls once every five years. It includes political awareness and maturity as well as interest of the citizenry to partake in the socio-political life of their nation. Right now, Singaporeans are so apathetic that they are simply content to leave the entire running of the nation to the nanny state dominated by one single party with no independent institutions to check on it which lies the greatest danger. How can Singaporeans be sure that their leaders are always capable and incorruptible? What if one Chen Shui Bian were to take over the reins of the government one day, will we be able to detect his chicanery, let alone remove him from power via peaceful and legal means? The archaic political system which has served the ruling party so well for five decades is a ticking time bomb for Singapore once the senior leaders pass on for there is no system in place to check on the incumbent to ensure some sort of accountability and transparency on its part. There is no free press to expose the mistakes and fallacies of the executive. The Law Society is muzzled not to speak up on legislative matters unless asked to. The opposition is too weak to poise any challenge on the ruling party and Singaporeans remain far and large, ignorant and disinterested in the current affairs and politics. Unless Singaporeans wake up from their slumber, our rankings in "democratic institutions" and "personal freedoms" will continue to fall and will eventually drag down the other economic sub-indices one day.  Read More →