TR EMERITUS

Photos contributed by Michelle Zeng                    Read More →

By Fang Zhi Yuan and Eugene Yeo Prologue After playing down his political ambitions for two months since he was thrusted into the limelight by being an advocate for the troubled minibond investors, Mr Tan Kin Lian had finally announced his interest in the elected presidency or MP. In an article published on Sunday Times, 'Tan Kin Lian eyes elected presidency", Mr Tan said he will run for either the presidency or MP if he is able to gather 100,000 signatures.   We ask our panel of 3 writers of what they think of Mr Tan's plan to run for public office. In addition, we have invited 3 bloggers to share with us their thoughts - Mr Daniel Ling of Information Read by Me, Mr Gabriel Sim of Simply Gab and Mr Ng E Jay of Sgpolitics Mr Tan has repeatedly denied that he has any political motives for helping the investors. What are the possible reasons for this abrupt U-turn now ? Daniel:  A) It could be tat these events were actually planned for since we all noe tat LKY is likely reaching limits soon thus there will be a need for a new Knight to be God for the next generation. Who better than someone who ve stood up for the masses in times of need? (B) Then again, he could be really persuaded by a close friend to try to change the system. (C) Or he could be genuinely feeling tat the system is in dire need of change thus the U Turn. E Jay: I've given a possible reason in my blog posting. If Mr Tan does indeed have at least some political ambitions, it would be perfectly understandable for him to downplay them and dissuade people from second-guessing him at this stage, when he is not ready to declare his intentions yet. That would be both politically appropriate and savvy. Hence, I don't think he has really U-turned. His need for 100,000 signatures appears to be a high hurdle that he deliberately set so as to avoid being pressured into something he does not wish to do. Eugene: I beg to differ from E Jay. Declaring one's bid for public office publicly is no small matter, he could easily reject his supporters' suggestion to do so and nobody could have coerced him. It is probably a gimmick to "test the waters" first to see if it is safe to take a full plunge. Zhi Yuan: I do not think Mr Tan has harbored much political ambitions initially. The groundswell of support for him from the investors may provide him with an impetus to consider otherwise. Gabriel: If you were to describe his current interest in office as an abrupt u-turn, are you then suggesting that he had an ulterior motive behind his championing of investor interests with regards to mini-bond fiasco? I do no know the man personally so I can't comment on this. Ulterior motive or not, I believe the affected investors would not be too concerned as they are to an extent indebted to him for elevating their concerns. Perhaps this is the first time he has been so close and connected to the ground that he was struck by how much needs to change, or at least how desperate and powerless they were Do you think Mr Tan will gather enough signatures on the ground to support his bid ? Daniel: If 1A, then yes, sure can gather enough signatures since he will ve the backing of PAP. 1B or 1C, possible since 10k investors + family members + frenz is a high chance of getting 100k approvals. E Jay: I really don't know, but it appears unlikely. The 100,000 number, as I've said, is probably a deliberately high hurdle he set. He may have felt that is an unlikely target. Eugene: It is impossible he is able to garner even half the number. Knowing how politically ignorant Singaporeans are, not many would have heard of him in the first place. I can foresee the answer his supporters will get if they go around in the streets asking strangers to write down their particulars and sign the petition: "Simi dai ji ? Will you pay me if I sign ?" Zhi Yuan: "Haha, that's a good one. If Mr Tan is really keen to run for public office to provide Singaporeans with an alternative, I believe he will go ahead if he can secure at least 10,000 signatures and that is a lot by local standards. Since when did an online petition even hit close to this number ? Gabriel: To be honest, I am not too optimistic about his chances for becoming president. However, if he were to instead contest a SMC as an independent, he might stand a better chance. By running as an independent, he will not be burdened with the historical baggage of other parties.   Now, we know that Mr Tan has been a PAP member for the last 30 years and he is no ordinary PAP member. He was actually a branch secretary with intimate links with Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong. Why did he decide to quit the party only 3 months ago and now wanting to run for elected office ? E Jay: The minibonds saga probably provided him an opportunity to ease himself out of the establishment framework and quit the PAP "gracefully". Otherwise, if he had quit the PAP and explored alternative political ambitions earlier without any compelling external reason, people may think he is jumping ship because PAP will not give him what he needs to satisfy his ambitions (if he has any). Gabriel: This outlines the problem with the Singapore political system. So many of our institutions, and as a result its top executives, are intimately linked with the PAP to the extent that the hidden hand of the Government is more of an obtrusive arm. As ex-CEO of NTUC, this revelation is not surprising. But alas, we do not know the extent of this relationship.  Eugene: Seriously, I have doubts about him. Why would anybody quit PAP after 30 long years ? Mr Tan claimed he is disappointed with the PAP for losing touch with the common people, but that already happen like 10 years ago ! Why did he take so long to quit the PAP and the timing coincides with the eruption of the minibond fiasco, so something is quite fishy here. Zhi Yuan: That's an exaggeration, Eugene. He may not be able to quit the party as long he is still the CEO of NTUC INCOME. I will give Mr Tan the benefit of the doubt.   In the interview, Mr Tan made some rather bold criticisms of PAP's policies. How do you think the government will react ? Daniel: If 1A, likely PAP will try to "shut" him down. After which failing to do so, he will get in somehow? Maybe not as President but as a Senior Member, etc? After which maybe some of the less direct Impact changes can be made but the Big Impact issues will remain unchange due to diffculties, etc. If 1B or 1C then PAP may forcefully try to shut him down. Successful anot will depend. Gabriel: Same as they always do, in a knee-jerk fashion. Won't be surprised if he is called for tea with SM Goh. But I believe they will be more careful this time around in their character assasination. They wouldnt want a repeat of the Gomez saga. E Jay: Govt will probably say nothing, as they might not want to be seen attacking Tan Kin Lian at a time when he is helping out investors fervently. Eugene: Haha, what if they have given him "permission" to do so beforehand. Never underestimate the degree of "wayang" the PAP will go through to promote somebody of their choice for the next president. Zhi Yuan: I agree with E Jay. They have been keeping mum on Mr Tan's protests for a long time and will continue to do so in the near future unless their position is threatened which is highly unlikely. With no offence to Mr Tan, he is hardly a threat to the PAP now. However, if he is able to attract enough credible Singaporeans to join him, it will be a different ball game altogether and we may see the PAP adopting a more forceful stance against him.   Mr Tan also said that "he will run if enough Singaporeans want change." What exaclty does he mean by "change" ? Daniel: His currently asking for opinions on wat is the public opinion of changes on his blog. http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/11/manifesto-future-of-singapore.html If 1A, it could be a mole thing to gather wat r the issues tat pple r concern about. As for wat he feels is "changes", tat only he can answer. =D E Jay: I think he deliberately left the word "change" open to interpretation, but I figure he is most likely referring to having more opposition and independent voices in Parliament. Eugene: Sorry I am the eternal skeptic. Change what ? How much change can he bring after being a PAP member for 30 years ? Can his mindset be changed at his age now ? Zhi Yuan: I do not know if Mr Tan used the word "change" on purpose or is he misquoted by the journalist. He needs to be very specific or else all sort of misinterpretations will arise in the minds of ordinary Singaporeans reading the article. If he wants to change the government or the PAP system, then it is unlikely he will get any support at all. Singaporeans are not ready for the kind of "change" which has swept Malaysia and USA. They merely desire more opposition in Parliament to check on the PAP and that is not considered a "change" to me. Gabriel: This is linked to my first point. As much as Kin Lian's eyes have been opened to the woes of the common man, perhaps he has seen the eyes of common man open to the fallacy of their long held beliefs that the PAP knows best. If their confidence with the PAP is lost together with the value of their structured notes, the impetus for change develops. I would however caution Kin Lian against trying to ride on Obama-ism without clarifying the change he intends to bring. I hope he will follow up with a manifesto on the specific change he advocates and not wait till the results of the petition are out. Also read the last roundtable discussion on Malaysia and Singapore education system  Read More →

Background: Chen Meimei has five boys, the eldest is 14 and the youngest is only 5. Her husband works as an odd-job laborer earning $800 monthly only if there is work available for him. She had a major operation 10 years ago for liver infection and is unable to work. The family of seven lives in a 2 room flat which appears to be poorly maintained. In spite of the hardship, Meimei claimed she is happy just to fulfil her duties as a wife to her husband and a mother to her 5 children. PART 1  [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKsxpUwCcG4&hl=en&fs=1]   PART 2 [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToPanDIfGi0&hl=en&fs=1]    Read More →