TR EMERITUS

I refer to The Online Citizen GE2025 news report, “Lee Hsien Yang: Is a Parliament full of PAP MPs really better for Singaporeans?” - (April 14), and “The Straits Times’ report, “GE2025: Singaporeans will go to the polls on May 3, Nomination Day on April 23” (April 15), and The Online Citizen GE2025 report, “RDU criticizes election timeline, claims ruling party benefits from short campaign period” (April 25). It’s worth noting that in a recent Facebook post on Sunday, 13 April, LHY emphasised the importance of enhancing greater political diversity, accountability, transparency and opposition representation within Singapore's political landscape. We can easily notice that in the past parliament sittings, quite a number of the ruling party’s Members of Parliament seldom spoke for his or her constituents’ concerns, difficulties in their living and aspirations (in terms of the frequency, number of questions/issues asked/filed in the parliament and their in-depth in debating). Beside this unhealthy drawback, when they come to voting for some controversial and difficult issues of the proposed bills or the amendments of the constitution law (such as the issues of: raising the GST from 7% to 9%, debates for the increases of electricity and water tariffs bills , and all PAP’s MPs voted in favour of the move to repeal a decade-old law 377A of the Penal Code which criminalises gay sex while endorsing changes to the Constitution to protect the current definition of marriage from legal challenge), almost all the MPs from the ruling party have to toe the line with their party’s stance. This is commonly perceived as the strict restrictions of the ruling party’s whip and it cannot be violated. On the contrary, opposition party members have less political baggage (by choosing and voting for the opposition candidacy). They dare to directly respond to and convey the opinions and wishes of their constituents or voters, such as the difficulties they encounter in life and their demands for a better life in the parliament more often. That is why make a distinctive or big difference between choosing an opposition candidate and the ruling party’s candidate. Guiguzi, a thinker and military strategist during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States Periods of China, He repeatedly stressed that if one wants to understand the world, one must understand the national conditions and the people's wishes in order to infer whether the country will prosper or decline. Let us review his warm reminder. As we know, the first Cooling-off Day was implemented for Singapore’s general election in 2011. No campaigning activities are allowed on Cooling-off Day (which is designated as the day before polling day to give voters time to think rationally and reflect on the issues that were raised during the campaigning period). Since then, the political campaigning activities for the respective parties have left a tiny range of nine days. Obviously, it is too short and unfair for the entire opposition, because the ruling party has the clear advantage - mainstream media (including all the Television and Radio Stations) is widely regarded as the mouthpiece of the ruling party for donkey’s years. This has provided wider and deeper media coverage for the ruling party. Hence, the respective opposition parties should walk the ground/their constituency thoroughly(preferably days and nights) to address their party’s manifesto and advocacy. And, most importantly, to rally the support from their constituents. Beside, they have to focus upon and summarise what they really want to advocate and address their voters. These advocacy can be nimbly presented in many ways/forms. For examples, making live Facebook videos, YouTube videos, TikTok, Instagram and getting presentation on social media interviews to propagate and put forward their manifesto, proposals and ideas. In this direction, Dr Chee Soon Juan of the Singapore’s Democratic Party (SDP) has done a good job by clearly summing up his views and position on why it is vital for voting for the SDP, and also systematically summed up ten shortcomings of the ruling party in his Facebook’s videos. In any case, it is more effective and economically to reach and communicate with the vast young voting group through videos on online social media platforms, which can better interact with them and touch their hearts. This is rightly combined with the principle expounded in Sun Tzu's Art of War: Going to war with a just cause, and how to seize the right time and place.   Teo Kueh Liang (Mr)    Read More →

The PAP has always been standing on the side of the employers, especially those running big businesses, be they local or foreign owned. We see it not by their words but by their actions, which frequently benefit this select group. For example, the PAP government has signed 27 Free Trade Agreements to guarantee investors’ rights, pursued a bigger population to feed businesses, brought in many foreign workers to boost profits, used taxpayers’ money to subsidize and bailout businesses, allowed big businesses to merge therefore increasing their monopolistic powers, and kept corporate tax rate relatively low while increasing GST. On the other hand, employees, who form the majority of the people, are treated as economic digits. For example, their collective will is suppressed by a pseudo union sanctioned by the government lest their demands become too burdensome for employers; they are replaced by hungrier foreigners if they can’t work longer hours and survive on a lower pay; they can be summarily dismissed without mandated compensation if they are not needed. Employers and employees have always been engaged in a perpetual tug-of-war - who gets to have more of the spoils of economic exertion and more say in the conditions of work. It is played out silently in the background, with periods in time when the employers have the ascendancy, and then excesses set in and the system collapses and the employees gain the ascendancy, as was the case in Singapore in the 1950s and 60s when employers were wary of the powerful labor unions, when employees had a lot of bargaining power and investors thought long and hard before investing; and then the employers plot their way back, oftentimes with the help of the government and gain the ascendency again, as has happened now. This struggle between employers and employees is the most important issue in the internal politics of our country because it is about the livelihood and wellbeing of every citizen. From time to time, urgent and crucial issues crop up, for example, the current trade war recklessly started by Mr Trump that may wreck havoc on world trade; then, of course, all hands will have to be on deck to mitigate the problem, but it will pass. However, the tug-of-war between employers and employees would still be quietly playing out in the background. The maneuvers of the employers are usually undertaken surreptitiously: they - via the employers’ federations and business associations - always hide behind the politician to further their interests, who in turn, is careful, even deceitful, in trying to advance those agendas. For example, during Covid, when many employers were staring at substantial losses, even bankruptcy, and needed the government to bail them out with taxpayers’ money, the phrase the politician used, was always to “save jobs”, never to “bail out” the struggling employers. When employers needed cheaper foreign workers to boost profits, the narrative is either foreign workers will help “keep the cost of living down”, or foreign workers will “create more jobs for Singaporeans”, but never that they are good for profits. The situation in Singapore is even more dire because in addition to the power the government has, just by carrying out its normal functions, it has diversified into business, further increasing its power. Just in Singapore, Temasek Holdings probably controls more than 50% of the economy. This is a major conflict of interest. Temasek, as an employer, can easily influence the government to shape policies to benefit its companies, at the expense of the employees. What we need now is an opposition party that will represent the needs of employees because their voices have been drowned out by the voices of the employers who are strongly represented by the PAP. Its core mission must be to gain back the ground lost to the employers, who have been winning with the help of the PAP. This is because the root cause of most of the problems facing Singaporeans today is due to the disproportionate powers of the employers vis-a-vis the employees. The current opposition has spent countless hours in parliament debating issues arising from the influx of foreign workers, about the increase of GST, about the high cost of living - which is well and good - but at the end of the day, the government simply dismisses them or tweaks its policies, and continues in the same general course, because the opposition has been targeting the symptoms but not the root cause, which is the structure that gives the employers their disproportionate powers. They need to fight for all labour unions to be non-partisan, scrap the oxymoron that is tripartism, bring back collective bargaining and the right to strike, and repeal all the laws that are unfair to employees. If there were real unions instead of the Trojan horse, a.k.a., NTUC, there would be far fewer foreign workers because no real union would let foreigners dilute its members. With less foreign workers, the demand for Singaporeans would increase, leading to higher wages for low-wage workers and lower underemployment of former PMETs, there would be far fewer low-value added businesses and uncompetitive businesses, leading to a smaller population, and less social problems. The Total Fertility Rate may even increase. A smaller economy doesn’t mean a weaker economy. Instead, it would be even more resilient and suited for the needs of Singapore. For one, it would be anchored by Singaporeans, for another, it would constitute mainly high value-added industries compatible with a small but highly educated population. However, employers would not be happy because many of them would see their pie shrinking or even disappearing. But attacking the structures that give employers and their backers their power, will certainly result in a swift and brutal response. They will use all their powers to see to the demise of that opposition party. But this is the type of opposition that Singapore needs, rather than the “loyal, constructive and responsible” opposition that prods the government, that, by and large, disagrees on technicalities rather than principle, that never attacks the root causes that are oppressing Singaporeans, because it will be too hot to handle. The worst thing that can happen for Singapore is having two major political parties seemingly opposing each other thereby offering Singaporeans alternative voices at the ballot box, but both, in effect, supporting the employers - which is highly possible because they are rich and powerful - while still disenfranchising the employees who form the majority of the people. It is unhealthy to have the employers overly represented in parliament, at the expense of the employees. We need both groups to be well represented to balance each other, otherwise, the ascendant group will push their agendas beyond the limits and destroys the system, to everyone’s detriment.   Foong Swee Fong    Read More →

I’m not an influencer, not a tycoon, and certainly not someone with the means to buy votes. I’m just an ordinary middle-class Singaporean — part of the working class that wakes up, goes to work, pays the bills, and tries to get by. But like many of you, I care deeply about what’s happening in our country. And I believe we need to talk about the plagues we’re facing — plagues brought about by an incompetent government that seems out of touch with the lives of everyday people. The cost of living is spiraling out of control. Immigration is surging, straining infrastructure and job opportunities. Public spending appears unchecked, with grand projects and flashy initiatives, yet what actually trickles down to the man on the street? A few vouchers here and there — tokens, really — while net taxation continues to benefit the government more than the people. Life is becoming more difficult and unpleasant for the average Singaporean. Only the rich seem to be enjoying this playground. Meanwhile, many are asking — when will the government truly act in the interest of the people? Or are they too busy jet-setting, snapping up properties, and securing their own financial futures? Just look at the frequent turnover of PAP candidates. It suggests a deeper issue — a lack of long-term commitment, and perhaps a flawed selection process. If the people chosen to lead aren’t even staying the course, how can we trust them to guide us in the right direction? It’s hard to have confidence in such a government. But here’s the thing — you can make a difference in GE2025. You can send a clear message that the people are watching, thinking, and voting for change. A vote is not just a mark on a paper — it’s a voice, a slap on the face of complacency, and a stand for accountability. Let’s vote for people who will put Singaporeans first — with people-centric policies that improve lives, not just balance sheets. Because if ordinary citizens like us don’t speak up and step up — who will?   CWC-AI    Read More →