TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent Following a vigorous debate on the Straits Times Forum on the merits and demerits of having more foreigners, the state-controlled media has been tasked again to moderate public discourse in favor of its political masters. A deluge of articles were published on the Forum today (25 August 2009) urging Singaporeans to accept and welcome foreigners including that of an American turned Singaporean, Bernie Utchenik aka Botak Jones. Letters critical of the government's pro-foreigner policy as well as those from ex-Singaporeans exulting the quality of life in other countries were conspicuous by their absence. Mr Harry Ng's letter, titled "Embrace foreigners" was given prominent coverage by the Straits Times to ensure that readers do not miss it. (read letter here) He defended having PRs in Singapore schools to provide healthy competition and to upgrade the social skills of our local students. What Mr Ng failed to mention is that many of these PRs did not go on to pursue their tertiary education in Singapore nor do they take up citizenship and serve National Service. A place taken up by a PR student is one less for a Singapore citizen whose future will remain in Singapore. The PR can afford to emigrate to another country, but the Singaporean will have nowhere else to go. Mr Ng also quoted the example of Yahoo founder Jerry Yang who moved from Taiwan to the United States, was educated in the US, became a citizen and founded a company which created many jobs. "He could do so primarily because of a liberal US immigration policy and an embracing education platform. Perhaps Singapore can cultivate successful entrepreneurs in future if we are more open-minded about foreigners.", he wrote. The U.S. does have a liberal immigration policy, but it is not an open-door policy like Singapore. The rights of local citizens are protected by the government and it is not that easy to become a PR or citizen in the U.S. Entrepreneurs cannot be "cultivated". They can only emerge and flourish in an environment which promote freedom of thought and speech. The world-class talents will never choose to settle in an one-party police state in Singapore where even solo protests are outlawed. Perhaps Mr Ng has forgotten about Singpore's only world renowned entrepreneur Sim Wong Hoo who founded Creative Technologies in the United States and not in Singapore. Bernie Utchenik must be one of the few Americans who are wise (or foolish) enough to take up Singapore citizenship. For every Bernie Utchenik, there are many other Singaporeans who have migrated to the United States. Being a new citizen, Bernie is not aware of the political history, culture and baggage of Singapore just like new immigrants to the United States are seldom bothered by the political divide between the Democrats and the Republicans. He wrote: "I can only shake my head when people complain about Singapore without offering alternatives or stating how this place or that place is better." (read letter here) Again, he is regurgitating the usual PAP propaganda that criticism must be "constructive" and "alternatives" should be provided. Before Bernie shakes his head, he should at least stop and ponder over the complaints he have heard - are they reasonable at all? Singaporeans are well known to be "complaint kings" who are incredibly passive, unmotivated and apathetic citizens largely the result of the nanny state created by the ruling party. Over the years, the ruling party has grown to dominate all the institutions in Singapore. It dislikes public scrutiny and seldom take into consideration the sentiments on the ground in its policy-formulation because of its majority in Parliament, it can simply bulldoze its way true and force unpopular policies down our throats. This eventually leads to apathy, disillusionment and cynicism among Singaporeans who do not feel they are treated fairly and equally as citizens of their countries. Furthermore, it is not the duty of citizens to provide better alternatives for the highly paid ministers and civil servants. They have no access to data, statistics and information privy only to government officials. Bernie should talk his talk by offering constructive criticism with alternatives to the government, but before he embarked on his noble quest, he should first lobby the ruling party to introduce a "Freedom of Information Act" like in the United States so that important information will not be held back from the public just because somebody has decided that it will not serve any "strategic purpose". Having been brought up in a country with a free press, it is surprising that Bernie is not remotely aware of the inherent deficiencies of a one-party state in complete control of the mainstream media - the government becomes sheltered from criticism and real problems faced by citizens are brushed under the carpet. As usual, the state media will not tolerate any discussion or debate on matters which have already been decided by the ruling party. The few articles lampooning the government's foreigner policy are merely part of a gimmick for citizens to "let off some steam". After a few days of "wayang", the message sent out by the establishment is unmistakable - "Shut up and sit down!". Foreigners are here to stay, whether you like it or not, you have to embrace them.   Related articles: >> A Canadian and ex-Singaporean speaks by Wing Lee Cheong >> SwetaAgarwal proud to be Indian citizen >> 'PRs v Citizens' debate rages on in cyberspace   EDITORS' NOTE: As long the mainstream media remained under the control of the ruling party, Singaporeans will forever be brainwashed by the official propaganda. We need an online news portal with a large enough readership to counter the mainstream media which is exactly what we are doing now. We need your help to reach out to a wider audience. Please forward the URL of this site to all your relatives, friends and colleagues. 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: www.twitter.com/temasekreview  Read More →

By Amanda Lian, Social Correspondent As I was invited to this consultation workshop by Maruah on the 22 August 2009, I decided that our readers should be let in on the various issues that came up for discussions and ultimately, what I learnt from the whole day event at Novotel, Clarke Quay in Singapore. Held privately in the Phoenix room on the 6th floor of the hotel, we were seated orderly in front of the main speakers at 9am sharp. Followed closely was a welcome address by Ambassador Rodolfo C. Severino, Dr. Wilhelm Hofmeister and Ms. Braema Mathiaparanam. How are they connected to this forum you might ask? Ambassador Rodolfo C. Severino is the head of the ASEAN Studies Centre at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore and more than qualified to be present. Next, we have Dr. Wilhelm Hofmeister who is the Director of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation’s Regional Programme, Political Dialogue Asia. Last but not least on the welcome speech was Ms. Braema Mathiaparanam, the Chairperson of Maruah Singapore and also the foundation of this whole event. Known to us was that they are all well-read and published writers on various human rights issues in Asia. If you have been an avid follower on the ASEAN movement or the recent human rights issues, then you would be delighted to find out that many issues have been brought up and addressed at this forum by the speakers. The speakers present include Ambassador Ong Keng Yong, Dr. Sriprapha Petcharamesree, Ms. Shanthi Dairium and Mr. Arpee Santiago. The papers presented by them are “Singapore’s participation in the AICHR establishment process”, “Challenges in the AICHR”, “Role of Sectoral Bodies in the AICHR” and “Going Forward”. Ambassador Ong Keng Yong: Many issues are brought up during the presentation and therefore, the Question and Answer segment was prolonged to accommodate to the needs of the participants – to be able to find out more about ASEAN human rights. One thing to take away from all the replies was that women’s rights are not discrimination and women are not natural victims to equality or other social issues. We have to marry democratic values to human rights and ASEAN has achieved that. How can we be sure? Before, when there was no ASEAN, we were governed only by common law. Now, we have the ASEAN charter and so, we have more obligations and responsibilities and among all the countries involved, if any one country were to disagree on a term or clause, the rest cannot proceed to the next step until the current problem has been resolved. In Asia, of the countries in ASEAN, there have been many changes to the human rights issues. Thailand who used to be very conservative is opening up and while certain issues which used to be taboo in the Singaporean context are slowly gaining exposure. So while the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Commission on Human Rights is here to stay, we must stay informed about how it is going to aid us and make it a meaningful addition to our society. On a lighter note, albeit having discussed about the serious issues, participants were treated to a catered lunch and rejuvenated as a result. During lunch, we were given the chance to mingle with the speakers and I took the chance to gather more insight on the ASEAN human rights issues. When asked about his take on all these changes in ASEAN, “Life’s a ploy,” mused Ambassador Ong Keng Yong. For now, at least Singaporeans are ranked high in the happiness index. The future of human rights in Singapore is in the hands of the younger generation, individuals between the ages of 20-35.   Key Points to Note: Maruah means dignity in Malay Acronyms like AICOHR, TOR, CEDAW, AICHR   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!  Read More →

From our Correspondent Singapore has reiterated its committment to the Suzhou Industrial Park during a joint steering council meeting on 24 August 2009. It also pledges to work together with China to ensure that the SIP continues to develop as 'a vibrant, internationally competitive and modern high tech industrial park that is ecologically sustainable'. The China-Suzhou Industrial Park (SIP) was set up in 1994 at the outskirts of the Suzhou City in Jiangsu province with the help of Singapore funds and expertise. Singapore owned a 65% stake in the park. Gallery: [imagebrowser id=17] Even as the park was being constructed, the Suzhou City government set up Suzhou New District Industrial Park (SND) right next to SIP. It was the exact replica of the Singapore model. As the Suzhou City government had a majority stake in SND, it largely ignored the SIP and concentrated on promoting the SND instead. After incurring losses of some US$90 million over 5 years, the Singapore consortium lowered its stake to 35 percent, raising the Chinese consortium’s stake to 65 percent from 35 percent and reducing the Singaporean share from a planned 70 sq.km. to just 8 sq.km (source: wikipedia) One year after Singapore lowered its stake, the park made its first profit of $3.8 million. Till today, it was not revealed the exact amount of money Singapore had loss in the Suzhou Industrial Park. The SIP celebrated its 15th anniversary in May. Over the past five years, the industrial park has enjoyed the best spurt in development and growth in its 15 years history. GDP has grown by an average of 20 per cent in the past five years to 100.2 billion yuan (S$21.1 billion), according to a Singapore's Ministry of Trade and Industry statement. The continued involvement of Singapore with the SIP is a testimony of the growing trade ties between Singapore and PRC. Besides Suzhou, the Singapore government is also planning similiar joint ventures in Nanjing, Tianjing and Shenyang. Many Singaporeans have flocked to China to work and live in the last few years. For some retirees, its low cost of living and familiar culture is a major selling point for them to spend their golden years there. Singapore has also attracted a large number of Chinese nationals with many becoming PRs and citizens. Despite the cozy ties between the two governments, Singaporeans remain lukewarm towards PRC. Their women are often vilified as husband-snatchers while the men as uncouth country bumpkins. The influx of large numbers of Chinese nationals who do not speak the English language has led to calls for more stringent criteria to be set for PRs and new citizens.   Related articles: >> Suzhou Industrial Park becomes model of Singapore-China cooperation >> Why there was zero "foresight" in investing in Suzhou Industrial Park by The Brotherhood Press  Read More →