TR EMERITUS

From our Correspondent In a recent dialogue on town council finance management organized by the Ministry of National Development, residents called on the town councils to be more transparent over the way the sinking funds are used. Each town council has a sinking fund accumulated from the monthly S&C charges paid by residents. It is meant for long-term maintenance projects. The councils are also allowed to invest up to a third of the sinking funds in non-government stocks, securities and bonds. A furore was generated last year after revelations that the PAP town councils had lost over $10 million dollars of sinking funds in the purchase of credit-linked investments. The two opposition town councils of Potong Pasir and Hougang did not suffer any losses from failed investments. Though the controversy prompted the affected town councils from publishing their accounts online for the public to view, little was revealed about their internal decision-making process. Many questioned the rationale behind the town councils' investment in risky financial products and the wisdom of accuring such a surplus when S&C charges have been rising steadily over the years. The Chairman of PAP Town Councils Dr Teo Ho Pin defended the need for town councils to generate healthy returns from their sinking funds in save for rainy days in the future. The residents said they want the councils to be more clear on how this money will be used and suggest the councils publish a list of works to be carried out over the next few years. The annual Town Council Management Report, to be out next year, will assess town councils on level of estate cleanliness, maintenance of amenities and financial management. While it is commendable that the town councils are being held to greater accountability and transparency, there are still some state agencies which remain enshrouded in a cloak of secrecy, one of which is giant sovereign wealth fund Temasek Holdings. Temasek saw a decline in 31% of its portfolio last year. Nobody has been questioned or held accountable for the billions of public monies lost in its soured investments so far.  Read More →

From our Correspondent In a recent interview with German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong described Singapore's model of governance as "one that tries to achieve a balance between delivering quality leadership and giving people the opportunity to voice their dissatisfaction with government policies" (read full article here) It is a "system" that has worked well and one that has not let the people of Singapore down, he proclaimed. Given the fact that the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) he belonged to is the government of Singapore for an uninterrupted 50 years, it appeared that the "system" has indeed not let the PAP down. PM Lee was asked if Singapore might become ‘even more democratic’ in future, as it had recently relaxed its rules on public assemblies and was introducing changes to the political system to enable more opposition voices in Parliament. Little did the German paper know that Singapore has now outlawed solo protests in any part of the country under than the Speakers' Corner at Hong Lim Park and that CCTVs have just been installed there by the police to monitor future events for the sake of public "safety and security". The cosmetic "changes" in the political system allow more alternative voices to be aired and heard in Parliament without threatening the PAP's hegemony and power to pass bills and legislation unhindered. PM Lee said Singapore did not believe in the Western liberal democratic model which developed in the last half-century as ‘the pinnacle of human achievement and the solution for the whole of the world’. However, he failed to elaborate further on the "Western model". Democracy is not only about conducting free and fair elections. It encompasses other pillars of society such as an independent judiciary, a free press and a vibrant civil society which are found seriously wanting in Singapore. Values espoused by democratic institutions such as human rights, freedom of speech, civil liberties etc. are not only unique to Western liberal democracies, but are recognized, adopted and practised by Asian democracies such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Indonesia and to a certain extent, Malaysia and Thailand. PM Lee used the example of Indonesia to illustrate the repercussions of forcing a "precipitate change in the system" which resulted in Indonesia going through a ‘very difficult decade’ before reaching its present situation. He conveniently forgot to mention that cronyism, corruption and nepotism are rampant under Suharto. Though Indonesia had gone through an eventful transition in the immediate years after Suharto's downfall, it has now become a model of democracy in the region. The army has now retreated from politics for good. An anti-corruption watchdog is vested with real prowess to investigate and prosecute corrupt officials including a son-in-law of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. There is now real separation of power between the executive and the judiciary. Under the old system, Suharto was "elected" as President continuously for 30 years. There are no ways to removed him legally.Now, Indonesians are never as free as before. In the recent Presidential election which was considered fairly free, Susilo was re-elected with 61% of the votes cast. He will step down after completing his second 5 year term. The German newspaper also asked Mr Lee why there were ‘no signs of dissatisfaction’ with the Government, despite the country facing one of its worst recessions since independence. While there is an element truth in Mr Lee's answers, they missed out the two most important reasons for the lack of dissent amongst Singapore workers: first, there are literally no independent trade unions in Singapore to represent their interests as almost all of them are tightly controlled under the umbrella of NTUC which is helmed by a PAP minister and second, protests, rallies and strikes are outlawed in Singapore. For Singapore, Mr Lee said, having a good system is important, but getting good people to run it is equally crucial. However, how can an uncompetitive system which is bent on perpetuating a political monopoly ever produce good people to run it? The present Singapore's political system is an obsolete one which does not commensurate with our developed modern economy. It may serve us well in the initial years post-independence, but its inherent deficiencies have become ever more glaring with passing time. A one-party state cannot be expected to check on itself due to conflicting interests and priorities between the party and the state. What is beneficial to the state is often detrimental to the party's stranglehold on power. In spite of all its flaws, democracy has enabled the United States to become a superpower in less than 300 years of its founding. In contrast, feudal China lagged behind in development and is still playing catch-up with the West. Singapore is a small country. Every single citizen counts. A liberal democracy will not only increase civic participation and a sense of belonging among Singaporeans, it will also put us in good stead to face the challenges ahead as a one, united nation.   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! Thank you!]  Read More →

A ticking time bomb The government must be appalled and disturbed by the rising anti-establishment sentiment in cyberspace. Not a day passed in Singapore's boisterous chatrooms without a PAP leader or policy being attacked and ridiculed. While I applaud the government for keeping its promise to adopt a "light-touch" approach towards the internet and allow the online community to self-regulate themselves, the recent furore over the Tan Yong Soon and Seng Han Thong debacles which were partly sparked off by bloggers and netizens showed that the government need to do much more to engage the online community. Singapore has one of the highest internet penetration rate in the world at 85%. Netizens are comprised chiefly of young IT-savvy students and professionals and this will form a powerful voting bloc in future elections. These group of voters are not beholdened to the PAP like their parents and will not hesitate to cast a protest vote against the ruling party should they think that their concerns are not addressed adequately by the government. The government need only look across the Causeway to see for themselves the impact Malaysia's bloggers have made on the political landscape. Frequently brushed off as "pests" and ignored by the Malaysian government, these political bloggers as epitomized by the example of Raja Petra Kamarrudin of Malaysia Today have gained sufficient clout through their writings to have a say in national affairs, surpassing even the elected leaders in terms of respect and credibility. Then, the Malaysian government made a big blunder of choosing to ostracize the blogging community by dismissing their online posts as utter rubbish and hogwash. They thought they can reply on the print media to manipulate public opinion. It turned out to be a disastrous mistake as the last general election have shown, credible online dailies like Malaysiakini and bloggers combined to counter the propaganda of the mainstream media and propelled the opposition to win an unprecedented five states. Our astute leaders and policy makers in the government must have realized the wrong moves made by their counterparts in Malaysia. What else can they do to engage netizens ? I hereby propose three strategies to the government in the form of classic Chinese war strategems - upper, middle and lower strategies. Shang4 Ce4 ('upper' strategy): Engage netizens on their own turfs The government's decision to limit its contact only through their official portal REACH is too cautious and conservative. Only a minority of netizens will bother to give feedback to the government through REACH. Most just want to find a site to discuss current affairs and to let off steam. The government will miss catching the attention of the majority of netizens should they persist in their myopic approach. Of course it is not possible for the government to reply to every misinformation, rumor or complaint found on the internet. Rear-Admiral Lui Tuck Yew had mentioned that the government is open to engage in responsible and credible sites in the future, so why not select a few major sites in Singapore's blogosphere to begin with. The two major political blogs in Singapore with the highest readership between them are The Online Citizen (TOC) and Wayang Party Club. However, as the two blogs have radically different editorial policies and thereby attracting different groups of netizens, the government should fine-tune its approach to engage them on an individual basis instead of a "one size fit all" strategy. The Online Citizen is a serious, objective and balanced socio-political news blog which carries thoughtful critiques and analyses from a diversity of well-regarded writers, many of whom are respected community leaders in their individual professions. Most of its readers are neutral or pro-establishment netizens who are genuinely interested in the country's socio-political development like myself. (Though I write infrequently for Wayangparty.com, I must admit I am an avid TOC fan) TOC can serve as a useful bridge between the government and netizens as its key writers are not unfamiliar to the establishment. Its Chief Editor Choo Zheng Xi was a YPAP member and a speech writer of PAP MP Madam Ho Geok Choo. Its founder Andrew Loh was a PAP member too and so was Mr Tan Kin Lian, ex-CEO of NTUC INCOME who was a PAP member for 30 years and the right-hand man of Mr Goh Chok Tong in Marine Parade GRC. Most notably, TOC has expressed its desire to engage the government actively. One of its senior writer, Mr Gerald Giam, a pro-PAP blogger who was a close aide of Foreign Minister George Yeo during his stint with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs made an impassioned plea on Channel News Asia's current affairs programme - "Talking Point" not too ago for the government to engage credible news sites like TOC directly. The government should consider getting a young PAP MP such as Mr Zaqy Mohamad who was in charge of the PAP Internet Subcommittee to join the Editorial Team of TOC as a guest writer. Mr Zaqy or any other p65 MPs such as Mr Baey Yam Keng, Mr Christopher De Souza and Dr Lam Pin Min can contribute a weekly article on TOC and answer questions from netizens directly in their personal capacities. TOC should consider organizing joint activities with YPAP and other quasi-government organizations to give the government a platform to interact with netizens who may be unwilling to attend government-organized seminars. At the same time, it will give TOC's credibility and readership a boost. As for Wayangparty.com, though its credibility lack far behind TOC's, it should not be ignored completely either given its sizeable readership which comprises chiefly of staunch opposition members and supporters. The government should pay close attention to what is written on Wayangparty.com and send members of its internet brigade to rebuke any untruths and lies being sprouted here. In spite of its sometimes fierce anti-government rhetoric and salvoes of diatribes fired at the establishment, the editors of Wayangparty have proven themselves to be reasonable people as illustrated by their open apology to MP Seng Han Thong for being insensitive towards his misfortune. Instead of threatening to arrest bloggers who spread "malicious rumors" about government leaders and office holders, the authorities should give them the credit when their articles are quoted by the mainstream press which will win them a great deal of  goodwill and respect from netizens. Zhong1 Ce4 ('middle strategy'): Rebuke rumor-mongerers to dispel misconceptions The government can take a leaf out of Malaysia's example by appointing retired civil servants to be "internet guardians". Divide them into teams with each team in charge of a particular forum or blog. They will be tasked to monitor the posts, threads and comments posted there daily and to expose and rebuke any misinformation whenever they arise. Though this method does not facilitate communication between the government and netizens, it will help to clarify misconceptions about certain policies and make for easier governance. A lie repeated and multiplied several times will soon be regarded as the gospel truth. The first impression is always the strongest and once a misperception is generated and imprinted in the minds of netizens, it will be almost impossible for the government to shake it off and therefore speed is of paramount importance in countering the false and baseless rumors circulating in cyberspace. Xia4 Ce4 ('lower' strategy): 'Kill' one to silent the rest The most effective and direct way to stem the tide of internet dissent (temporarily) is to arrest and charge one or two bloggers for inciting hatred and anger against the government and the rest will automatically shut up. Though its impact is immediate, I would urge the government to strongly refrain from doing so as it will have serious repercussions on their image and reputation. Short of making the charged blogger a matyr and a 'national hero' instantaneously, it does not address the deep underlying mistrust and sceptism netizens have towards the government. In fact, it will compound the problem which will bounce back not too long later with a vengence. It will also be a dramatic U-turn of its promise not to regulate the internet. As the Malaysian example have shown, the arrest of Raja Petra under ISA not only did not achieve the desired outcome of stopping the malicious lies he had been spreading about the PM-designate Datuk Najib Tun Razak, it made Raja Petra a folk hero in the eyes of the people and they capitulated eventually to public pressure by releasing him. Conclusion The Singapore government must do its utmost to prevent further straining its fragile ties with the online community which may soon become irreparable should they persist in hurling veiled threats at netizens. Given the rapid pace at which internet technologies are evolving, there need to be a fundamental shift in the government's mindset and strategy to package and  communicate its intent and message in a more palatable and acceptable form to netizens who will be peeved from being talked down to as is the current mode of interaction with the officialdom. I sincerely hope the government will consider my proposal seriously to appoint The Online Citizen as their unofficial spokesperson in cyberspace for there are no other credible blogs in sight now other than TOC to bridge the widening chasm between the government and blogosphere. By Lim Yii Tong, Guest Columnist EDITORS' NOTE: The above article was contributed to us by one of our guest writers whose views does not represent those held by the owners of this blog.  Read More →