TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent The letter written by PR Ms Agarwal who threaten to leave Singapore if her children are not given equal chance in Primary 1 registration has continued to attract criticisms from Singaporeans with many describing her as an "obnoxious" PR and asking her to "bugger off" back to India. Wrote Ghostrider666: "Let's not lose sight of the issue here. In this case, Ms Agrawal, the PR, is the person who has a lot to grumble about if her daughter fails to get into a Good school, .......Ms Agrawal is the one who says that she will 'bugger off' if her daughter can't get into a GOOD school here. So, I say let her 'bugger off'. We don't care. It's her wish." Arthurl felt citizens are entitled to their priviledges and do not have to account to anybody: "Come off it Mrs Agarwal. All citizens of any countries have a right to their privileges and we do not owe you an explanation.....We do NOT owe you an explanation. If you are so adamant of your stand, make a U Turn and head back to where you came from and see what type of privilege you have in your own country. So do not try to assert your rights!" Many Singaporeans are outraged that PRs are enjoying almost the same benefits with them without the accompanying responsibilities. jpkyong wants the government to impose time-limit for PRs: "Corrective action by the Govt is long overdue. There should be a time-limit of 5 years for all PRs to take up citizenship or leave. All countries have this restriction except Singapore. Why are we allowing these free-loading foreign leeches to make suckers out of our people? Don't we have any more self-respect as a nation?" jojo2008 wrote about his own personal experience of PRs "exploiting" the system for their benefit: "I have colleagues and friends who's been working here for years, and exploit the PR system: - Indian national working here for more than 10 years become citizen, (Yes) to enjoy baby bonus and buy HDB while wife is a PR. - Malaysian couple run a successful (well known) business here becomes a citizen in order to buy HDB, meanwhile son (my friend who actually told me this), who's had a singapore education since young, is not a citizen and does not see the need to, today has a business in johore but is actually living in singapore cos he's clients are here. - Indonesian with a singapore education since young declares a income (from his "business") whenever he needs to renew his PR status actually make money buying and selling condos here. - Australian colleague here for more than 10 years secured PR status as a form of security as it buys him time and allows him to hang around singapore should he loses his current job. There are quite a number of foreigners who's doing just for this reason. And frankly, most of them are mid level managers whose jobs can easily be done by singaporeans. Unfortunately, these so call "foreign talents" already have their own network here, and any vacancies available are thus taken by them." Some are peeved by the government's pro-foreigner policy at the expense of the  interests of citizens: Wrote Trofeo: "Many other countries also adopt very open policies that allow foreigners into their country and workforce. But the difference between they way they have gone about it versus the way Singapore has gone about it is this- They are very clear about their priorities. They welcome foreigners but their citizens will always enjoy certain privileges and advantages over foreigners. For eg. before any company can hire a foreigner, they need to prove that they have taken the necessary measures to try and fill the position locally. Only then are they allowed to hire a foreigner. In Singapore, citizens and foreigners compete for jobs on a equal footing. Singaporean males may even be disadvantaged compared to their foreign counterparts because of their annual "downtime" due to their reservist obligations." AbolishNs had a stunning revelation: "I served almost 20 yrs in grassroot org; I recently learnt that a 1st gen PR [ who didn't serve NS ] simply serve 12 mths in a Resident Committee - can register his eldest child during Phase 2B for pri sch of his choice. This is more priority than our ordinary NS Men's child. I verified and confirmed this with People's Assoc." In spite of MM Lee's exhortation to Singaporeans to accept and welcome foreigners with open arms as they are "vital" to our economy, many Singaporeans remained unconvinced. The rapid influx of foreigners into Singapore has changed the demographics of the population dramatically. Some of these newcomers are not able to speak a simple word of English. Repeated calls by the government to foreigners to "adapt" to the local culture has gone unheeded as enclaves began to emerge in the HDB heartlands. The government has even gone of its way to use taxpayers' monies to organize events to make the PRs "feel at home". With such a "caring" government, it is little wonder that most PRs will opt to remain as PRs for now since it doesn't bring them additional benefit to become citizens. PRs are not eligible to vote to take part in elections. Then again, there are many citizens out there who have never even voted once in their lives.   EDITORS' NOTE: Selected comments taken from ST Discussion Board  Read More →

By Eugene Yeo, Consultant Editor "Gratitude to the PAP" is a recurring unspoken theme of every National Day. This year, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spent almost 20 minutes of his National Day Rally showing clips of Singapore in the 1950s and 1960s to illustrate the tremendous progress we have made for the last 50 years (under the leadership of the PAP, of course). I concur with the Prime Minister. Every Singapore citizen owes a debt of gratitude, not to the present PAP, but to the PAP Old guards, such as Toh Chin Chye, Goh Keng Swee, S Rajaratnam, Lim Kim San, E W Barker and Ong Pang Boon who toiled selflessly with a pittance of pay to bring social stability and economic development to Singapore against all odds. I salute these men because during that time, Singapore is facing a very uncertain future. They could have easily left for greener pastures elsewhere instead of gambling their entire lives and fortunes on Singapore. These are men of ideals, principles and vision, who knows and understands the plight of the common men in the street and willing to serve without being paid millions of dollars. When S Rajaratnam passed away a few years ago, I wept, not because of his passing, but because so few young Singaporeans are aware of his contributions. We hardly heard of our pioneers these days in the papers. Toh Chin Chye got a rare mention last year when her daughter passed away. I have heard nothing about Goh Keng Swee. What happened to these leaders whom Singaporeans truly love and respect? Why are they not present at the National Day Parade or Rally? What do they think about the present government's policies? Do they still care for the people of Singapore? Or are we going to hear about them again only when their photos appear in the Straits Times (you know what) page? It will be too little, too late. There is a Chinese saying: "When we drink the water, we should think of its source." Singapore will not be what it is today without these great men and women, the giants of our time. Not only am I thankful to them, I love, respect and admire them sincerely and truthfully from the bottom of my heart. Armchair critics like me have always been dismissed by the establishment as an unwanted nuisance or as "bacteria" according to a SPH journalist. We are accused of being ungrateful, unpatriotic and even disloyal to our nation. I served two and half years of National Service during which I had a training-related accident which almost took my life. Have I contributed to my nation any less than those new citizens waving the Singapore flag sheepishly at the National Day Parade? Anybody who criticizes the government is considered anti-Singapore. Is it easier to be a critic or a yes-man? I have been doing "National Service" for Singapore in every single day of my life, be it eating, working or sleeping, I have been thinking, pondering and analyzing over these questions: What is wrong with my country? What are the problems besieging Singapore now? What does the future hold for us? Can we continue with such a system? Are my fellow citizens getting a fair deal from the government? If every Singapore man has the duty to bear arms to defend our nation, then it doesn't make any sense for us not to be allowed to question decisions made by the government and to criticize them when the need arises. In fact, the real traitors of Singapore are not its critics, but those who worship the PAP blindly like God. Hitler's Germany did not have a single critic. Neither does Stalin's Soviet Union has. The only two places in this world which are completely devoid of critics now are Burma and North Korea. Now back to the original topic of showing gratitude to the PAP. Even if they deserve it, they can at most claim 40% of the credit for transforming Singapore from Third world to First. Who then deserves the rest? Your father, my grandmother, our forefathers and every ordinary citizen of Singapore who have contributed to the nation in one way or another. Shouldn't we be grateful to them too? It is a fallacy that Singapore will not achieve its dizzy heights today without the PAP. Our economic success is remarkable, but it is definitely not a miracle as protrayed by certain quarters and now spinned into a myth in the national folklore. When Singapore achieved self-government in 1959, it was already a thriving regional commercial centre, a trading hub and an entrepot with one of the highest standard of living in Asia. Japan was still rebuilding after World War 2 while South Korea had not recovered completely from the devastation of the Korean War. In a way, Singapore is already one step ahead of its neighbors. We did not start way down below, but very near the top. How can the PAP possibly fail? The Straits of Malacca is the world's busiest waterways. Over 70% of the world's trade passes through it. Singapore is the only deep-water port in the entire Southeast Asia that can handle the bulk of this trade, no thanks to the British which has been building and expanding its port facilities for the last hundred years. Singapore is an oasis of peace saddled in an unstable region wrecked by ethnic strife and religious animosity. While Singapore has its fair share of riots, strikes and violence, the bulk of fighting under the Emergency took place in Peninsula Malaya and by 1955 after the Baling Talks in 1955, the situation was more or less under control. [Some may argue that without the PAP, Singapore will become a communist state. This is impossible for two reasons - the Britain and Malaysia will never allow it to happen and the "communist" leaders accused by the PAP such as Lim Chin Siong are more nationalist than Marxist as evident from archives released by London subsequently. We shall leave this to a future article] Our small size, though it deprives us of natural resources, was a blessing in disguise in another way as it made governance so much easier, enabling the government to remove the hooligans from the streets, construct public housing for every Singaporean, build sheltered walkways connecting every block and of course ensured that the rubbish is cleared on time. Try doing that in Malaysia, Indonesia or Thailand and see if the PAP is able to get anything done so quickly and efficiently. The British did not leave us improverished or in a mess like some of its other colonies in the Middle East. We inherit the British education system, civil service, judiciary and Westminister model of government (though it was not practised by the ruling party) from them. They are the ones who built Singapore from a fishing village into a major trading center of the world, not the PAP. The infrastructure they left behind formed the basis for our economic development. The British naval base was built at a staggering cost of 60 billion pounds and it was the largest dry dock in the world then. After the British departure in 1968, it was transformed into a successful ship-repairing and building venture by Swan Hunter which provided jobs for thousands of Singaporeans. Dr Albert Winsemius, a Dutch economist, produced the economic blueprint for Singapore when he advised the government to focus on labor-intensive and export-oriented industries such as electronics and manufacturing which created employment opportunities for young Singaporeans, enabling our economy to really take off. Yet, very few Singaporeans have heard about this great benefactor of Singapore, to whom we must express our gratitude too. Lastly, let us not forget the "quality" of our people if it is the right word to use. I am extremely proud of Singaporeans. Where else in the world can you find a people so honest, hardworking, disciplined, thrifty and obedient like us? We have one of the highest saving rates in the world. Otherwise, how can Temasek and GIC afford to splurge billions of dollars overseas? The Chinese, Hong Kongers and Taiwanese share the same characteristics as us too, but they are not that easy to "handle". When ex-Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee Hwa tried to make some amendments to the Basic Law, 500,000 Hong Kongers turned up in the streets a few days later hurling abuses and vulgarities at him and his family. Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou suffered a similiar fate too when he tried to move closer to China. 100,000 Taiwanese surrounded his government office in Taipei to protest against him "betraying" their interests. In Singapore, they will surely end up in jail if our jails are big enough to accommodate them in the first place. 44 years after achieving independence, we are on our own. We owe a debt of gratitude to the first generation of PAP leaders, but not to the present batch. If the PAP insists that we remembered their contributions forever, then we might as well extend our "gratitude" all the way back to the British with the founding of Singapore in 1819 by Sir Stamford Raffles. After all, without the British pouring in their nation's resources to develop Singapore, you and I may still be ploughing the fields somewhere in China or India. It is time really to move on. Nostalgia and clinging to past achievements will not bring us anywhere. Rather than wasting time and energy to glorify the past, the PAP should do something more practical and meaningful: give due respect and honor to their founding members when they are still alive. Please lead by example and show us what "gratitude" is all about.   Other articles by Eugene Yeo: >> Singapore's limit: an unthinking and unquestioning citizenry >> Debunking the “constructive opposition” illusion >> How Singapore manage to lose its opposition over the years  Read More →

From our Correspondent For the first time, Finance Minister Tharman found himself under a barrage of questions from his own PAP colleagues. MPs took turns to grill the Finance Minister on the abrupt departure of Temasek CEO-designate Chip Goodyear and its succession plans for the future. The issue has come under intense public scrutiny. Singaporeans are discomfited by ex-CEO Ho Ching taking over the organization again. Despite 25 minutes of questioning, Mr Tharman refused to bulge. His reason: disclosing the "strategic" differences behind Goodyear's departure will serve no "strategic" purposes. 'It is not sufficient that there be curiosity and interest (for information to be disclosed),' he said, after Mr Low Thia Khiang, opposition MP for Hougang, asked if it was right for Temasek to keep Singaporeans in the dark. Mr Tharman pointed out that Temasek already makes more public disclosures on its investment performance and strategy than comparable organisations. What really mattered was its performance over the long-term, he stressed. When Temasek lost billions of dollars last year, Mr Tharman also defended it on the grounds of "long-term" performance. However, he did not specific a time-frame for it. To Mr Seah Kian Peng's suggestion to impose a time line for a successor to be chosen, Mr Tharman replied that none would be imposed on the process which means that Ho Ching will probably be in charge for a "long time" to come. Founded in 1974 to manage Singapore's reserves, Temasek Holdings has grown to become one of the largest sovereign wealth funds in the world. Initially a conservative, domestic-based investor, Temasek under the leadership of Ho Ching was transformed into an "Asian investment company". Her ill-timed, if not reckless forays into the financial market has been blamed for much of Temasek's losses. The sale of Bank of America and Barclays shares at their record low price in March this year cost Temasek billions of dollars. Though it was apparent by then that the decision to do so was unwise, nobody dares to take the Temasek board to task including the Finance Minister, who is supposedly in charge of Temasek. With the Finance Ministry "washing their hands" off Temasek, it appears that it is now truly an "independent" commercial entity though it is funded entirely by taxpayers' monies.  Read More →