TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent A 48 year old man, Mr Tan Ying Rong died from overwork last week when he fainted at home! Mr Tan owned a drycleaning store and reportedly work for more than 12 hours a day, according to Lianhe Wanbao. His son, a 19-year-old polytechnic student, told the Chinese daily: "He would work every day from seven in the morning until seven at night. Because it was his own business, he did everything himself. He hardly rested and would continue working on weekends and public holidays." Mr Tan's body was discovered by his daughter, who noticed that he had fainted in the living room. Alarmed, the girl woke the entire family up and called for an ambulance. However he could not be resuscitated by the paramedics when they arrived. Mr Tan died from heart exhaustion, possibly caused by overwork, said Lianhe Wanbao. His wife injured her spine from work too and had to rest at home leaving Mr Tan as the sole homemaker. It is not revealed what Mr Tan's monthly income is and if it is enough to support his family. It is not uncommon to see Singaporeans working long hours to make ends meet. Some even have to hold on two or three jobs. In a recent report released by UBS, Singaporeans spend the most hours at work in a year after Hong Kong among developed countries, but we spend less time on vacations than the Hong Kongers. Coincidentally, a 48 year old Singaporean by the name of George Koo wrote a letter to the Straits Times Forum today expressing his concerns for the older workers. "I am 48 and worried about job opportunities for older workers if this present trend of ignoring older workers persists in the mindset of employers. Many of my friends in their 40s and early 50s are unable to find jobs, even if the job they apply for suits their past experience." The Singapore government has been encouraging Singaporeans to continue working well into their twilight years in order to support themselves as there is little social safety net for them. Faced with a declining birth rate, the government has also opened the floodgates to allow more foreigners to work and live in Singapore which helps to depress the wages of locals, especially those from the lower income group. Singapore workers above the age of 50 are at a losing end because their employers' CPF contributions are reduced to 10.5 per cent in order to make them more employable. The government's obsession with creating jobs at the neglect of social welfare benefits for the workers was revealed lately by MM Lee at the Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum. When asked if the widening income gap is of a concern, he replied in a dismissive tone that it is inevitable in a globalized world and it is far more important to create jobs for Singaporeans. Though Singapore's unemployment rate remains low, the stagnant wages coupled with a rising cost of living means that the standard of living has not improved by much in the last few years. The government is reluctant to spend more to help the lower income group with the usual excuse that it will lead to a "crutch mentality". If the situation continues, we will be seeing more cases of Mr Tan in the future. Related articles: >> NUS student expressed disappointment at pre-selected questions during Kent Ridge Forum >> Researcher from LKY School debunks LKY's views that widening income gap is inevitable EDITORS’ NOTE: If you like our work and would like to support us, please transfer your donations via paypal to our account ([email protected]). Any amount will be greatly appreciated! Alternatively, you can also help boost our advertising revenue by clicking on the ads displayed. Thank you! Join our tweet at: http://www.twitter.com/temasekreview  Read More →

From our Correspondent A disgruntled Singaporean has written to the Straits Times Forum questioning the Singapore government why it has not done more to cool the property market. Hsu Chong Pin used the example of Hong Kong to illustrate the measures taken by its government to curb the rapid price hikes and asked why Singapore has not followed suit. Hong Kong has increased the down payment ratio to 40 per cent for properties above HK$20 million (S$3.6 million). For those priced below HK$20 million, the maximum loan of HK$12 million applies. He wrote: "...the down payment ratio of property purchases in Hong Kong seems to be at least 10 percentage points higher than Singapore's. Two, an increase in down payment ratio is the most effective measure to curb property price increases in Singapore as a direct demand-side measure." The property prices in Singapore have sky-rocketed in recent weeks with those from the private sector increasing by more than 15.3 per cent. Prices of resale HDB flats also hit a record high with median COVs of more than $10,000. While there are fears from some quarters that a property bubble is evolving, the general sentiment remains buoyant and positive with the opening of the two integrated resorts next year. Singapore's low entry barrier of 20 per cent in down payment ratio which is lower than Hong Kong's will continue to attract investors and speculators alike into its private property market of which 70 per cent is owned by foreigners. The rise in private property prices also spill over to the public housing sector leading to sky-high prices in resale flats. Despite evidence on the contrary, the government is adamant that HDB flats remain "affordable" to ordinary Singaporeans. Over 100 protestors marched in the streets of Hong Kong last week to protest against the surging housing prices. In contrast, Singaporeans restrict their complaints chiefly in cyberspace which is largely ineffectual. An online petition launched two months ago to the government to cool the property market has garnered more than 1,000 signatures, but it is unsure if the government is even aware of its existence. The government has been using the state media to defend itself against charges of incompetency and negligence which has led to the runaway inflation in prices, especially that of public housing. Buyers who are unable to obtain a flat of their choice are blamed for being too "fussy". Mr Hsu ended his letter by asking the government what it is doing to cool the property sector: "What will the Government do to cool the property sector, in view of the similarly strong increase in property prices in the third quarter? Will there be an increase in the down payment ratio and if not, why?" He is unlikely to obtain a clear answer from the authorities, if any at all.  Read More →

OPINION Of the seven pillars of democracy outlined by Anand Panyarachun, Singapore has only one - elections and even then, they can hardly be considered as free and fair given the short campaigning period, the opposition's lack of media access and the absence of an independent elections commission. The bitter truth is, Singapore's elections are merely a farce in which no alternative parties other than the ruling party will ever hope to win with the odds stacked so strongly against them. The dearth of political tolerance, rule of law, freedom of expression, accountability and transparency and civil society in Singapore is best encapsulated by a damning report released by the International Bar Association's Human Rights Institute on Singapore following its annual conference held here in 2007: "The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) expressed concern about limitations on the freedoms of expression, assembly, and the press, and of the independence of the judiciary in Singapore.....‘As one of the world’s most successful economies, Singapore should be a leader in human rights and the rule of law, and should now have the confidence and maturity to recognise that this would be complementary, not contradictory, to its future prosperity,’ said Mark Ellis, Executive Director of the International Bar Association (IBA). ‘The IBAHRI has identified a number of areas in which Singapore falls far short of international standards. In particular, democratic debate and media comment are extremely restricted and government officials have initiated numerous successful defamation suits against both political and media critics.’ The IBAHRI report examines Singapore’s record on a range of human rights issues identified by the IBAHRI as a priority. This includes freedom of expression (for example, the use of defamation legislation to hinder opposition activities, and restrictions on freedom of the press and the internet), the independence of the judiciary (there have been allegations of executive influence), and freedom of assembly." Singaporeans are guaranteed freedom of speech and assembly under Article IV, Section 14 of the Singapore Constitution, but they are hardly put in practice with the ruling party introducing a series of draconian, if not repressive laws over the years to curtail the political and civil rights of citizens. A solo protest anywhere other that the designated Speakers' Corner at Hong Lim Park is now illegal under the law. Though Singaporeans are now allowed to gather and protest at Hong Lim Park, the police had installed CCTVs at its premises specifically to discourage them from doing so. Political dissent is criminalized by a variety of laws to prevent Singaporeans from expressing their dissatisfaction and disgust at the ruling party thereby breeding a sense of apathy, cynicism and despair in the citizenry. Of late, five Singaporeans were charged in court for conducting an "illegal procession" when all they did was to walk in a group in a public place from one point to another without holding any placards or shouting slogans. They were initially acquitted in court, but the Attorney-General Chambers amazingly found it necessary to appeal against the decision and seek to convict them. A relatively free press is an important component of any democracy to promote political discourse and debate. In Singapore, all the print media are controlled tightly by SPH, a government-linked company whose Chairman is always a former PAP minister. The blatantly pro-government stance of the SPH publications will put the Soviet Union's Pravda and China's Xinhua to shame for it is completely devoid of any sort of independent thinking and analysis except for the endless spins, propaganda and half-truths to trumpet the achievements of the regime and hide its atrocious mistakes out of public sight. Opposition leaders and activists are often portrayed as trouble-makers, crankpots and freaks to diminish their credibility and appeal while PAP MPs and ministers are worshiped as demi-gods incapable of making even the slightest mistake. The opposition is given little coverage except when they are involved in some scandals or law suits. On the contrary, the papers are abound with news of PAP leaders, especially its strongman Lee Kuan Yew who just simply refuse to fade away from the political scene at the age of 86. The infamous Singapore secret police, or the internal security department, a relic left behind by the British during the Communist Emergency in the 1950s, continues to cast a long shadow over Singaporeans and preventing them from being actively involved in politics and civil activism. In 1962, the opposition Barisan Sosialist was decimated by a wave of arrests of its key leaders under "Operation Coldstore" conducted by ISD's predecessor - the Internal Security Council. Many of them were detained for a number of years without trial, the longest being Chia Thye Poh (32 years), Dr Lim Hock Siew (19 years) and Said Zahari (17 years). In 1988, over 20 Catholic activists were arrested and detained by the ISD for a "marxist conspiracy" to subvert the state under "Operation Spectrum". One of the political detainees was a former Solicitor-General of Singapore, Mr Francis Seow who later went to exile in the United States. These chilling examples of Singapore's political history persists to this very day to strike fear and apathy in the hearts of every Singaporean. Few are willing to pay the price that these pioneers of Singapore had paid for their political beliefs. The use of defamation lawsuits to cripple the opposition have the unwanted effect of detering young Singaporeans from joining politics. The late opposition scion J.B. Jeyaretnam was implicated in many defamation lawsuits and bankrupted twice in his long suffering political career. SDP Secretary-General Dr Chee Soon Juan was an assistant professor in psychology at the National University of Singapore before he joined politics. He was sued for defamation first by P Vasoo, a PAP MP, followed by various PAP leaders in subsequent years, the latest being the Prime Minister and his father who were awarded damages of over $600,000 in a summary judgement. Though the PAP leaders have defended their ligitatious tendencies on the grounds of protecting their reputations, the astronomical sums awarded to them inevitably raise suspicions if they are intended to cripple their opponents financially as well as to demolish their standing in society completely. To quote from the IBA report as criticizing Singapore's judiciary is a hazardous affair: "Another area in which the independence of the judiciary is of concern is the cases involving the courts hearing defamation claims initiated by PAP officials......the slim likelihood of the successful defence of an action, combined with the extraordinarily high damages awarded in defamation cases involving PAP officials sheds doubt on the independence of the judiciary in these cases. The courts in defamation cases have substantial discretion in awarding judgment and damages. Under Orders 14 (Summary Judgment) and 78 (Defamation Actions), the court has substantial discretion to resolve the case without a hearing in open court and to permit the quantum of damages to be determined by a Registrar in chambers." The recent furore over the announcement of the Lift Upgrading Program (LUP) is another timely reminder that almost all institutions of the state are under the influence or control of the ruling party. Through the People's Association, a supposedly apolitical statutory board funded by taxpayers' monies, the ruling party has built a vast network of grassroots organizations in the form of residents' commitees and community centers covering every constituency in Singapore. Even in non-PAP wards, the PAP is able to parachute its rejected candidates to serve as "grassroots advisers" to interfere and hijack the daily running of the estates from their legitimate MPs. With the Registrar of Societies under the Ministry of Home Affairs having the arbitrary power to refuse registration of any society deem to be against "public interest", civil society is almost non-existent in Singapore. This explains the perennial weakness of the opposition parties and the lack of an alternative power center emerging from the grassroots itself to challenge the regime because all resources on the ground are firmly in the hands of the PA, a quasi-PAP organization. The above factors have combined over the years to de-politicize the citizenry to the extent that politics is now shunned by most young Singaporeans who prefer to pursue material comforts and possessions in life rather than to serve their fellow countrymen. The pervading and sometimes overwhelming sense of apathy, scepticism and fear of participating in politics is the biggest stumbling block to Singapore becoming a healthy and functioning democracy for there is no democracy without participation from the people. Until Singaporeans realize the importance of democracy and start demanding for it from the regime, the status quo is likely to remain for a long time to come for there is simply no impetus on the part of the incumbent to reform the archaic system which has served their interests so well over the years.  Read More →