TR EMERITUS

In God we Trust, All others show receipts I remember a Charlie Brown story. Linus was having some problem with his heart and he was clasping his chest. His sister, Lucy, asked him what happened? He said he felt his heart was having an internal conflict where the good was fighting the bad. So, Lucy asked him where is the good side, left or right of his heart?  He said right side. So, Lucy made him tilt his body to the left, so that the good on the right side would spill over and cover the bad of the left. PAP elite versus PAP grassroots It is sort of a cliché now to say that LKY is elite, even an elitist.  But in 1983, he removed Secretary General of NTUC; Lim Chee Onn, because he was, well, too elitist. The NTUC central committee was very unhappy because Mr Lim had brought in many scholars into NTUC, and they were left out of the decision making process. LKY maybe elitist, but he was adroit in balancing the ground with his policies. He was after all, rubbing shoulders with militant unionists and communists in his early political life. He wasn’t parachuted from the world of scholars into a prepared political position. He was in other words a grassroots leader. Unlike most of the second generation PAP MPs onward, LKY was not empowered by a patron but from the people. Presidential Election 2011 But the current narrative of a PAP divide came during and after the Presidential election of 2011; when Dr Tony Tan who was clearly the preferred candidate by the ruling party won by just 35.2% to Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s 34.8%. Dr Tan Cheng Bock in his campaign had alleged that his former PAP colleagues had told him they did not dare to openly support him for the election for fear of being "penalised" or "victimised". And that infuriated Dr Tony Tan, who retorted that, "this kind of fear-mongering is very mischievous". You may think that the rhetoric was only for the campaign, but Dr Tan Cheng Bock (TCB) had maintained that PAP is a divided house, and that the grassroots supported him.  And any insider would know that Dr Tan Cheng Bock was probably the most popular PAP MP that never made it into cabinet; not just among grassroots or ordinary PAP members but by the PAP cadres as well. And TCB had another dig at Dr Tony Tan, post-election, by saying that: 1.  "I am disappointed but I told my men not to be discouraged because at the end of the day, we won because we were fighting against the machinery." 2.  “You have to watch over the couple of months how he's (Dr Tony Tan) going to convince the other 65 per cent who didn't vote for him. Knowing that his strength is in the economy, he has to put some effort into the ground, because you can't just look after the external area - you have to concentrate on your people." In other words, TCB as a long time PAP MP is reaffirming for us, that PAP uses ‘the machinery’, and this immediately implies that MSM and other State resources somehow favored Dr Tony Tan. And that Dr Tony Tan although preferred by PAP is only a minority President, and that TCB is insinuating that Dr Tony Tan is elitist so he needs to: ‘put some effort into the ground’. Ok, so the popular discourse is that it is PAP elite versus grassroots. I don’t know the number of membership for PAP but I don’t think they determined the Presidential election per se. I don’t see how Dr Tan can literally mean that the PAP members determined the election. There are like another 2.2 million other voters.  I inferred from what he said, is that PAP is a microcosm of Singapore’s society. And that this society is now split between those that supported the old ways of doing things that elevate meritocracy (an interchangeable word with elitism in Singapore’s context) and support for Singapore International, versus those that are looking at another model that places people at the forefront of their policies. And TCB’s 2nd statement I quoted above, bears repeating: “……Knowing that his strength is in the economy, he has to put some effort into the ground, because you can't just look after the external area - you have to concentrate on your people." Grassroots versus Elite = People-centric versus Party-centric. Post GE 2011 Post General Election comments showed a contrite PAP Secretary-General, and a philosophical WP Secretary-General. PAP Lee Hsien Loong: “The PAP will analyse the results of the election, learn from what has emerged from this General Election, put right what is wrong, improve what can be made better, and also improve ourselves to serve Singaporeans better.” WP Low Thia Khiang: “Your votes tell us that Singapore is not just an economic success…but your home. “ “Your votes tell us that Singapore wants to mature as a democracy and tell the government that you want a responsible, inclusive and transparent government.” In other words, PM LHL had admitted that PAP is not doing enough, and in WP’s definition that ‘not enough’ is that Singapore is no longer a home. But like many others, even Cherian George who is by no means a sycophant, in his post GE comment predicted that: “The big issues that have dominated the elections – such as HDB prices, traffic congestion and the cost of living – will, ironically, be the easiest for the PAP to solve. These are problems that are open to technocratic solutions, and the PAP leaders and their civil servants are masters of navigating complex policy terrains when they have the political will to do so.” But what are the big issues? In his National Day Rally 2011, the Prime Minister did reiterate the issues of the cost of living, HDB, transport but he said this: “…In other words, we have to get our politics right as well as our policies right and if you can get both of these, then we can engage all our people to build Singapore together.  And to get both right, you must start with the politics, which is what I will do.“ What is the right politics? “…And we need active citizens to change our community for the better.  So work with us, make it happen, stand up and do our part to shape Singapore’s future. If we get this basic working relationship right, then we can get our policies right….” In other words, PM LHL had admitted that PAP is not getting their politics right. And in fact, he had reiterated the President’s 2014 message of ‘constructive politics’. So from 2011 ‘right politics’ to 2014 ‘constructive politics’, semantically is there a difference? Is like the proverbial question of whether the glass is half full or half empty. So, when he called for active citizens in 2011, he was trying to play to the national audience that PAP intends to be inclusive. But when they find that they cannot handle the flaming or the unabated assault on their flimsy policies they now have in 2014 changed it to ‘constructive politics’. Constructive to who? In any case I think a better word is competitive politics. But of course competition is not something PAP can handle very well. Conclusion In a post election analysis, Cherian George had talked about political capital: “Instead, the real challenge post-GE is to win back the people’s trust”. And recently Catherine Lim had reiterated the same theme; PAP had lost the trust of the people. Ever since GE 2011, there has been an amazing labyrinth of words and concepts to try to make sense of how Singaporeans are feeling politically, and how to assuage them, and how not to have a nation divided. In Dr Tan Cheng Bock’s narrative of elite versus grassroots, I suspect he did oversimplify the issues, but when he posited his candidacy as elite versus grassroots it spoke right to the hearts of many Singaporeans. But again, it is obvious it is about trust. Trust is a matter of the heart. Now, Low Thia Khiang is not as tall as PM Lee, he will win no beauty contest, not as eloquent as Dr Chee in English, but this man is wily, savvy and downright intelligent. And he understood that most of all Singapore is our home. The most luxurious hotel in the world will never be our home. Home is when there is common sharing of joy and especially suffering. If you cannot suffer with me, how can you be my brother? Home is where the heart is. Trust is gone because we don’t feel this is our home anymore. When jobs are dished out to foreigners, when old people have to pay their dues because of the folly of their youths, can a home have no compassion, no tears, only mercantile transactions? Like Linus (as above first paragraph), PAP has to see which side of their heart is people-centric, stand on one leg, and let the good side spill over to the bad side, otherwise, trust will be gone for good. BK *  Submitted by TRE reader. May not be reproduced without permission.    Read More →

(Source: darrensim.com) I read with interest Professor Kishore Mahbubani's piece on why Singaporeans should speak their national language, Bahasa Melayu ("Big Idea No. 5: Speak the National Language"; June 14). I agree with him that for economic and political reasons, Singaporeans should learn to speak Malay. In fact, I think it should be offered as a second language in schools. I doubt very much, however, whether it can ever become a language that will make our nation a more cohesive one. After all, as Prof Kishore pointed out, not many Singaporeans can speak the language these days. With the majority of the population being non-Malay, it will be difficult for them to have an incentive to learn the language. Through my interactions with people at work, I was surprised to learn that quite a number of Malay children are not interested in learning it either, just as many Chinese and Indian students are reluctant to learn their mother tongue. Whether one likes it or not, in generations to come, Singlish will become a "language" spoken by the majority of Singaporeans of all races. It will be a dialect that will unify us and identify us as Singaporean. Many Singaporeans these days discourage the use of Singlish as they argue that it could hamper communication with other English-speaking nationals. This need not be so as long as one is made aware that Singlish is not English, but an evolving dialect spoken by Singaporeans. Just as one does not speak Hokkien or Teochew to other English-speaking nationals at work, one should not speak Singlish to those who do not understand it. As a Singaporean, I often speak Singlish at home and with my kaki ("friends"). At work, however, I speak English to non-Singaporeans. As long as one makes this clear distinction between Singlish and English, there is nothing wrong with speaking and developing Singlish as our unofficial national "language". Lee Woon Kwang (Dr) * Letter first appeared in ST Forum, 17 Jun, "Like it or not, Singlish is the choice of most S'poreans".  Read More →

International news wire Reuters reported [Link] today (18 Jun) that Temasek's investee company, CITIC Resources Holding Ltd, is missing more than 100,000 tonnes of Alumina ore stored at the Qingdao port of China. CITIC Resources Holdings, listed on the Hong Kong exchange, is a a subsidiary of CITIC Group in China. It is a commodity trader of natural resources. Temasek Holdings owns 11.46% share in CITIC Resources and is the 2nd largest shareholder in the company after CITIC Group. CITIC Resources said that it did not have information on the current status of an investigation by Qingdao authorities and was not yet able to accurately assess the impact of the alleged fraud on the company. CITIC Resources is the latest firm caught up in a scandal that has raised broader worries about the risks of metal financing in China. The missing ore is currently linked to a separate probe into Decheng Mining, a trading unit of Dezheng Resources Holding Co Ltd. The authorities are probing into the alleged duplication of warehouse receipts to obtain multiple loans secured against a single cargo of metal. When a cargo arrives at a bonded warehouse in China, the warehouse company typically issues a receipt as proof of the stocks. The firm can then use the receipt to obtain short-term financing from a bank, using the metal cargo as collateral. This has become a popular method of raising finance in China, often to skirt higher local borrowing rates and other credit restrictions, and is not illegal. The short-term funds raised might be invested in other markets, such as property, or re-lent via the regular or shadow banking system. However, by duplicating receipts to repeatedly mortgage the full value of the cargo is fraudulent. It results in multiple creditors holding claims to the same collateral. "Authorities will be able to trace which company claimed the metal but if those stocks have already been liquidated then there's not much CITIC can do, especially if the other firm also had proper documentation," said a Shanghai-based metals trader. New citizen Chen Jihong The chairman of Dezheng Resources Holding is a Singaporean Chen Jihong. He is a new citizen. He was born in Shantou in the southern province of Guangdong. Chen has been trading metals since the 1990s, and is a well-known figure in Qingdao, a major metal hub on the eastern seaboard, according to industry sources. Bankers who have previously dealt with Chen said he has been detained by authorities since late April. Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) declined to comment on whether Chen had been detained but said it was monitoring the situation. Reuters managed to contact Chen's wife by phone from his home number in Singapore but she said she had not heard from her husband in many weeks and did not know where he was. Reuters reported [Link] that the trail which led investigators to Chen began with a Communist Party corruption probe in the old Silk Road city of Xining. In late April, the authorities were investigating Xining's Party Secretary, Mao Xiaobing, for graft. At the time, the authorities were also investigating Mao's business associates and one of them is Chen. Chen's business ties to Mao were through Western Mining Co Ltd, a Shanghai-listed subsidiary of state-controlled Western Mining Group. Sources said that by May, some Chinese banks had learned of Chen's detention and started cutting credit to the firm and asking for outstanding payments. By late May, Chinese and foreign banks and traders scrambling to check their Decheng-linked metal stocks found that commodities appeared to have been used for multiple financing. According to Chinese business daily Caixin, Dezheng Resources and its subsidiaries had borrowed a total of 14.8 billion yuan (US$2.38 billion) from banks. An ICBC official said Decheng has defaulted on loan repayments since April and owes the bank more than 100 million yuan ($16 million) for its onshore business unrelated to metals financing at Qingdao. CITIC Resources now joins a number of foreign financial institutions like Standard Bank Group and a part-owned unit of Louis Dreyfus, Singapore-listed GKE, which warned last week of potential losses. Standard Chartered has said it is reviewing metals financing to a small number of companies in China while Citi Group said it would work closely with authorities, warehousing companies and clients to resolve any issues. South Africa-based Standard Bank said it was investigating potential irregularities at Qingdao, but could not quantify losses, if any. AFP has also reported [Link] that one of Dezheng's subsidiaries took out 17 loans from six foreign lenders over the last decade, quoting a report from the 21st Century Business Herald (21st CBH). The report did not give totals but named them as Standard Chartered, HSBC, BNP Paribas, Singapore's DBS, Dutch-Belgian bank Fortis and KBC of Belgium. "We believe the developments in Qingdao are likely to continue the significant scaling back of [foreign exchange] inflows from foreign banks into China via commodity financing business," Goldman Sachs said. Goldman Sachs estimated that commodity finance deals in China were worth as much as US$160 billion, or about 31 percent of China's total short-term foreign exchange loans. The scandal has hit prices of global metals, reflecting market fears about business practices in China and worries that the probe could extend to other ports and prompt a crackdown on using metal as collateral for finance. Western investors are now particularly fearful that lifting the lid on even a seemingly isolated case of fraud in Chen's case may uncover more landmines lurking within China's opaque "shadow" financial system, and sent global banks and trading houses scrambling to check their exposure. If the charges on Chen are proven, Chen is truly a "talent" for single-handedly sending fears to all the global banks and investors involving in commodity financing trades in China.    Read More →