TR EMERITUS

“I HAVE BEEN “OBA” OF THIS TABLE FOR SO LONG BECAUSE I’VE ALWAYS KNOWN WHAT MY ENEMIES WOULD DO – EVEN BEFORE THEY THOUGHT OF IT.” – ENIOLA SALAMI IN KING OF BOYS: THE RETURN OF THE KING I’ve always had a fascination for different places and cultures. So, whilst I never really “made it” to a level where I got sent to all sorts of obscure places, I’ve been able to live my fantasies of being outside of the confines of small-town England or Singapore through watching movies shot in different parts of the world. I loved watching Kung-Fu movies because I got an idealized image of China and Hong Kong. You could say that I was most comfortable in “Chinatowns” because I always saw myself as the rickshaw puller in Chinatown who would somehow become a hero (my folks would shoot me for saying it, but I preferred to be seen as a “Collie” than an English gentleman inhabiting a Chinese body). As I grew older and the community that I interacted with more was increasingly Indian national, my interest in Bollywood grew. I found certain meanings from Bollywood movies, tried to pick up Hindi (which is easier for me than picking up Hokkien) and every Indian girl on screen was a goddess. I also had a fantasy of ending up with an Indian girl, after lengthy battles with my parents (which would never have happened. Firstly, I was never in a place where I could meet a Bollywood lookalike and secondly my parents are exceedingly open-minded, thus ruining any teenage needs I might have had of trying to rebel). I haven’t lost my fascination of with how people from all over the world might live. My greatest discovery during the various Covid imposed lock downs in the last year was “Nollywood” or Nigerian cinema. Whist Bollywood has become exceedingly “slick,” Nollywood is refreshingly crude. Many of the scenes look like they’ve been shot with a handheld video camera. The actors and actresses are not wonderfully attractive (they look like the rest of us) and that provides a wonderful sense of realism that you don’t get in either Hollywood or Bollywood. One of the things that Nollywood does well is to cover the corruption that Nigeria has become so famous for. If you watch Nollywood, you get to see how people expect palms to be greased for the smallest of things and you get a glimpse of how the chase for power becomes particularly addictive. I just finished a series called “King of Boys: The Return of the King,” which tells a story of a businesswoman who is also a gangster. She comes back from exile and proceeds to go into politics. The main character is violent (there’s a line which says that “peace of mind” is not for people like her), bribes and blackmails her way to power. In the end, she ends up as “Governor” of Lagos State (one of Nigeria’s wealthier ones), and rules from the top and she instills a successor for her underworld activities – hence he rules from below. There is a crucial point in the series when her enemies think they finally have her and she then explains that she remained “Oba” (Yoruba for ruler) of the table for so long because she always knew what her enemies were going to do before they even planned it.” This fictional character is providing the rest of us with much valuable advice – which is to know how the people we’re going to deal with, are going to react even before they know what they’re going to do. I believe the correct term is “empathy.” Modern management theory works on the maxim that “Information of power.” As such, everyone is focused on how to “acquire” information. People in leadership positions have become particularly obsessed with “gathering intelligence.” The idea is simple – the more I know about a given situation, the more I can act correctly. The follow up idea is that if I can limit your sources of information, the more I can limit your ability to act. Take CECA debates. Whatever one thinks of CECA, the government inevitably has the upper hand when it comes to quoting statistics. The reason is simple, they control the information flow. However, what people forget is that while controlling the flow of information is important in dealing with situations, there’s got to be an element of knowing what people will do with the information. It’s like this – if you know exactly what the other guy is going to do, you’ve won most of the battle. This, however, requires a certain characteristic. One needs empathy or at least some imagination. This is the ability to step into someone else’s shoes. Let’s go back to the recent events in Afghanistan as an example. We had a group of bearded men who managed to send the world’s most powerful military and information gathering machine packing. How did they do that? Part of the explanation was provided by former General HR McMaster, who served as National Security Advisor to the Trump administration. He argued that “we also assume that people are like us.” General McMaster then went onto argue that US policy makers made mistakes because they assumed the Taliban would act in the way that Americans would act. I will leave US military policy to better informed people. However, I do believe that the General has hit the nail on the head in as much as part of our failures in life come from the assumption that people are “exactly like us,” which in turn makes us unable to understand why people don’t do or react in the same way as us. Look at the current PAP government and how it handles issues like CECA. They came out with great statistics to get their points across. Take a look at the Ministry of Trade and Industry’s website on CECA, which says that 97,000 locals were employed by Singapore-based companies that invested in India in 2019: [LINK] I can’t dispute that statistic. However, what does that mean to a 40-year-old mid-career professional who has just been retrenched, can’t find a job and every time he steps in for an interview, the interviewer is inevitably from India? Has anyone in a policy making position ever thought of how you’d explain the benefits of CECA to someone in that position. If the Prime Minister seriously wants to secure his legacy, he should watch this Nollywood flick. He and his team need to understand that having statistics to support their policies is only part of the battle. The other part is, as former President Bill Clinton said is getting people to “feel it.” The ruling party needs to know and understand the people that it is ruling – otherwise it could end up being the most successful ruling party in history to lose an election.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.      Read More →

The Ministry of Health will introduce a new format of daily report that will not focus on linked and unlinked cases. I agree with the new approach. The reporting on unlinked cases is not useful and could be misleading. It takes attention away from the important data. I suggest the daily statistics report on the following: a) number of cases detected through quarantine b) number of cases detected through surveillance c) number of cases detected through regular testing of frontline workers d) number of cases detected through visits to doctors The first three categories are likely to be mild, as they are detected through regular testing of subjects who are well. The fourth category is likely to be more serious, i.e. the subjects visit a doctor because they are not well or have symptoms. We should also report the number of tests carried out daily under each of the first three category, so that the incidence rate can be calculated. At a later date, the quarantine, isolation and testing of the exposed subjects and front line workers can be stopped. This is not useful as most of the cases are likely to be mild. This change can be made when it is clear that the incidence rate is low and the majority of the positive cases (especially of vaccinated people) are mild and do not lead to sickness. As the covid is now endemic, these cases are likely to increase significantly. However, a large proportion of these cases will not lead to sickness, especially if the subjects have been vaccinated. Furthermore, when the subject is exposed to a mild infection and recovered from it, the body will develop natural immunity which can supplement the vaccine immunity. We can then focus on the cases where the subjects are sick and need to see a doctor. I suggest that the number of people that are admitted and discharged from the community care facility and hospital be reported each day. This allows a proper tracking and understanding of the seriousness of the infection. I hope that this approach is helpful.   Tan Kin Lian      Read More →

The Law & Home Affairs minister threw Progress Singapore Party (PSP) a challenge on CECA, they accepted it and the parliamentary debate is scheduled for Tuesday, 14th September after PSP filed their motion. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong also addressed the issue, citing that “Singaporeans are anxious about jobs, foreign competition, as well as the impact of the large number of foreigners working and living here". He also said that "These are valid concerns which we will address." Nevertheless, he cautioned against putting the blame on CECA as he thinks "that will not solve our problem but instead make it worse.” So finally we can all agree that we have a serious problem with large numbers of foreigners working and living in Singapore, and that this has impacted our job and economic opportunities. As such, it is imperative that every stakeholder act in good faith and contribute to this debate. To solve the problem at hand, we all need data and lots of it to comprehend where we have gone wrong. When the PAP became hesitant or reluctant in providing data needed for due analysis, it shows a degree of bad faith in addressing the challenges at hand. For a start, PSP needs to know the number of approved applicants under the Intra-Corporate Transfer (ICT) before they can add up the concession for the relocation of family members of approved applicants. What this means is that as every ICT applicant can bring spouse, parents, parents in-laws, children when they relocate to Singapore, there is a need to add up these numbers over the past 15 over years before we can determine the socio-economic impact of this concession. There is a need for clarification as to whether the accompanying family members are allowed to find employment locally and if so, what is the impact on local employment. To debunk allegations that these applicants were granted new citizenship, it helps if data can be provided as to how many of these applicants and family members were granted PR & citizenship over the past 15 years. If all the critical data can be provided, then the upcoming parliamentary debate can used effectively to help us clear up this mess once and for all please. Isn't that the objective of the debate? Lawrence Wong As such, l hope Lawrence Wong, the Finance Minister, will withdraw or amend his motion, which is looking like a distraction as its "Points of Motion", except for the first, are not only contradictory but they lack specifics. They are like asking the house to trust him by giving the government another blank cheque but without specifying any qualifying criteria. It is imperative for the Speaker of Parliament to question Lawrence on his various "Points of Motion" and demand that he be specific about them. In fact, the Speaker should remind the house not to waste its time and resources, and be strict in restricting all distractive arguments. With an increased interest in this debate, more Singaporeans can now witness first-hand the parliamentarians that they have voted into office and see their sincerity and dedication in serving their needs. Now that all the parliamentarians are being "eagle-eyed" by their voters, those who act foolishly may just find themselves out of favour with their voters in the next General Election, just like what happens to Ng Chee Meng & company at the last election. For those shortlisted for premiership to take over from PM Lee, it will be wise of them not to insult or belittle the intelligence of Singaporeans by trying to defend the indefensible, twist facts or be seen to be spineless. Those who can demonstrate that they can empathise with the hardships and sufferings of fellow Singaporeans, and can show firm resolve and urgency in addressing the root causes of their problems may just earn themselves the vital support of Singaporeans. As it is, Lawrence may just find himself critically out of favour with Singaporeans unless he withdraw his motion or amend his points of motion to reflect the socio-economic reality that is currently undermining the debate. But if he still think he can play politics, belittle fellow Singaporeans or twist facts to suit his arguments, then he may just end up like Ng Chee Meng. What is the use of being promised the premiership if he don't get elected? As this debate is about addressing the plights and hardships of Disadvantaged Singaporeans, even the parliamentarians from the Workers' Party (WP) would be compelled to ask some very Hard Questions as that is what WP is suppose to stand for and not be seen as being PAP-lite. I hope that all parliamentarians, elected or nominated, will wise up and show their best conduct and competency in this debate if they still believe that Singaporeans deserve better...   Joseph Nathan      Read More →