TR EMERITUS

I refer to the 4 Jun 2014 Straits Times report “From 50 sq km slum to green city in strife-torn Angola”. Surbana Managing Director Mr Louis Tay shared at the World Cities Summit about how African leaders often asked him if their countries can develop in less than the 40 years it took Singapore. African leaders are misinformed. Singapore was already at the cusp of becoming First World when it turned independent in 1965 as our 1960 per capita GDP adjusted for purchasing power parity was already in the Upper Middle Income bracket by World Bank classification today. LKY himself told businessmen in Chicago in 1967 that we were already a metropolis (you can’t turn a fishing village into a metropolis in two years). Mr Tay explained to his African friends that bigger, more populous Africa with oil, gas and diamonds should develop faster than small, low population, zero natural resource Singapore. • Does Mr Tay not know that the percentage of small population economies (less than 10 million) achieving World Bank’s High Income status is almost double that of large population economies (more than 10 million)? • Does Mr Tay not know that economies not dependent on natural resources (less than 5% of GDP) achieving World Bank’s High Income status is more than double that of economies dependent on natural resources (more than 5% of GDP)? • Does Mr Tay not know that Singapore has a natural resource far more precious than oil, natural gas or diamond? Our priceless geographical location has been the foundation of our prosperity since our founding in 1819. Mr Tay is thus wrong, large populous African nations will find their progress not as smooth or as quick as smaller more nimble populations having no natural resources. Thank you Ng Kok Lim Straits Times, From 50 sq km slum to green city in strife-torn Angola, 4 Jun 2014 ENGINEER Louis Tay, whose work takes him frequently to Africa, says leaders there always want to know if their countries can develop in less than the 40 years it took Singapore. Speaking on the sidelines of the World Cities Summit yesterday, Mr Tay said his answer is always: "Singapore has very little land, zero natural resources and only 5.4 million people. Your country is hundreds of times bigger, and you have oil, gas, diamonds and millions of people. Why can't you do it?" Mr Tay, 56, the managing director of aviation, city management and Africa for home-grown building and construction consultancy Surbana International Consultants, has worked to shape cities in, among others, Equatorial Guinea, Kenya, Niger, Nigeria and Rwanda, since 2003. He and his 20-strong team of planners and engineers are now trying to turn a 54 sq km slum in Angola, about five times the size of Punggol Town, into a green city. The slum, known as Cazenga-Sambizanga-Rangel (CSR), is right behind the central business district of Luanda, the expensive capital of rich but strife-torn Angola. CSR is also the hometown of Angola's present president, Mr Jose Eduardo dos Santos. About 2.1 million Angolans live there, many in illegal shelters with no proper sewerage system. Surbana's chief executive Pang Yee Ean, 45, said it has drawn up a masterplan for CSR that will, among other things: • Create 320,000 jobs for its residents by organising their livelihoods, mostly trading, into clusters to form something of a business park; • Build affordable housing, with rental flats for the poorest residents; and • Have environmentally friendly features. It is all in the spirit of sharing best practices that have made Singapore so liveable, said Mr Pang.  Read More →

Every Singaporean has to be forgiven for having the impression that our politics is actually petty politics of individual attacks and character assassinations. It is always about how to argue or talk cock to win a brownie point at best, nothing substantive or meaningful, and nothing constructive towards the well-being of citizens and a better future. And every encounter almost without failed ended up in the gutters with both parties ending up dirty with mud and shit all over. There is no dignity in this kind of political scuffles even for the winners. Oh, there were big issues being talked about but always a one sided affair. There seems to be a conscious effort to avoid discussing anything important or anything that will affect the people and the future of this island. Don’t believe me, check, any real discussion on the CPF issue or it is a case of I said so and it is now the law. So get on with your life. What about the PWP, was there any discussion, or serious discussion? Oh yes, they discussed and voted for it in Parliament. Really? Then why was there a big crowd at Hong Lim and why are the people still so angry about it? What about the cost of health care, the number of Singaporeans PMETs losing their jobs to foreigners, etc etc, were there really discussions, political discussions by political leaders? When would our politics take a leap forward to a higher plane, to really talk and discuss about serious issues and not personal attacks and ignoring the contrarian points raised? Maybe there were some school boy debates going on. I am wondering if they were serious discussions that men and women in leadership should be doing, or simply the blasting and pushing aside of someone without any attempt to listen? No need to talk, no need a second look, anything coming from the other side must be bad and not worth the time to look at. And serious discussions are not like kopitiam talks, when two parties just shoot it out and whoever can talk better, even when talking rubbish, would look good and clever. Serious discussions require serious and deep thoughts and take times to consider. The main stream media should take the lead to publish these thought processes in full not only for the authors to express their views fully but also to educate the masses of the opposing intellectual thinking. So far this appears to be the reserves of a few select academics and individuals. A few politicians may enjoy such a privilege to have their thoughts printed in the media, and rarely, if there was any coming from politicians from the wrong camp. In general, politicians did not seem to have serious ideas worth printings or to share with the public. Only academics are intelligent enough for this kind of works. Isn’t this strange, that the million dollar politicians don’t have better or worthier ideas than the academics to be aired in the media? It is high time that the MSM put in effort to allow our super talents to have a say in the press, at least to prove that they are really intelligent. It is also time to show the world that our super talents can think and their ideas are worth printing and reading and bestest. Why allocate so much valuable media space to foreigners that often have an agenda that could be contrary to our interests? Why allowed foreign propaganda and agenda to have so much space in our MSM, often written by dounces? There is a need for national issues to be aired in our media, by our thinkers, academics and politicians. Never mind if we only have a handful of thinkers. Never mind if only the thoughts of Mahbubani, Tommy Koh, Chan Heng Chee and Barry Desker are good enough for the time being. There must be others that have ideas that are worth reading and sharing.  Oh, I nearly missed out on Han Fook Kwang, Warren Fernandez and Chua Mui Hoong. This island cannot have only these few local thinkers, and the thousands of highly paid foreign correspondents to fill our pages telling us their coloured views of local and international events. We need to fill our pages with serious local issues, political issues, written by our very own thinkers. Please, spare us the new citizens. It is quite insulting to think that there is no works of local thinkers worth printing and only views of new citizens and foreigners are superior. Or it is true that we have no talents except the few in political office? When will we take this great leap of faith, to openly talk and discuss about our own affairs and our own futures? Can start with CPF, PWP for the moment. Or there is really nothing to discuss, or too sensitive to discuss or they are state secrets? Or there are no good enough or talented enough Singaporeans to discuss them? Or they are all too busy counting their money?   Chua Chin Leng aka redbean *The writer blogs at http://mysingaporenew.blogspot.com      Read More →

The following was emailed to [email protected] on 15th May 2014. There has been no reply (as of 24 June 2014). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Request for an interview with Mr Lee Kuan Yew Dear sir, My name is Martyn See. I am an political blogger and filmmaker. I have made films on Dr Chee Soon Juan, Mr Said Zahari and the late Dr Lim Hock Siew. I would like to request for a video interview with Mr Lee Kuan Yew. The final video will be published online on youtube, but the final cut will be subjected to the approval by your office. The interview will likely take about 90 minutes and will cover the following topics: A response to accusations of having served as a translator for the Japanese news agency during the Occupation. A response to open records of the National Archives of UK which contained testimonials that contradict the government's long-held assertions that Mr Lim Chin Siong and the detainees of Operation Coldstore were engaging in communist activities. A response to a published comment by Dr Toh Chin Chye that he did not understand why you had shed tears during the press conference over Separation when it was you who had wanted it. A response to the extended incarceration of Dr Chia Thye Poh. A response to the view that the Marxist conspiracy arrests of 1987/88 were based on bogus charges. A response to charges by Amnesty International and former detainees to the use of physical and psychological torture by the ISD. A response to a US State Department report that the government routinely conduct surveillance on the opposition and government critics. A response to a view that public funds, in particular the CPF, are used to prop up the investment losses suffered by GIC and Temasek Holdings. Your views on race, with regards to maintaining a Chinese majority in the country, Malays in the military, HDB's racial quota, race-based welfare organisations and the GRC system. A response to a view that government policies are increasingly being influenced by Christian moral values, particularly in the areas of sex education, arts censorship and rights of LGBTs. A response to the immigration and foreign workforce policies. An appraisal of Lee Hsien Loong's performance. A view on Lee Hsien Loong's likely successor. A prognosis of a post-LKY PAP and Singapore. An update of your health. Your views on spirituality, death and the afterlife. I look forward to your reply. Yours sincerely,   Martyn See * The writer blogs at http://singaporerebel.blogspot.com  Read More →