Hougang By Elections Update 2!

"PAP vs WP"

Desmond Choo (L) and Png Eng Huat (R).


Workers’ Party nominee has been announced, with little surprise.
Mr Png Eng Huat, a businessman will be WP’s candidate for the By Elections in Hougang.

Little is known about him but he stepped up after the infamous Yaw Shin Leong, former Member of Parliament for Hougang, was sacked by the Workers’ Party for personal indiscretions. While Low of WP initially maintained that those were just rumors, they eventually sacked him because he did not turn up for the meetings to clarify matters.
If someone Low has known for so long could have indiscretions which Low did not know about, what makes anyone think that Mr Png would be more trustworthy or have integrity? I’m not doubting whether Mr Png has integrity or not. I am questioning if Low and his party knows Mr Png well enough?

Yaw Shin Leong’s scandal was the first in Singapore. The first time an Opposition got into Parliament by winning a GRC and the first time a MP was sacked by his party for indiscretions. Till date, Yaw Shin Leong has not stepped up to clarify. Some friends call him a coward. I don’t know better – but I wished he came up to speak, be clear and as the phrase goes “BE A MAN.”

According this Channelnewsasia article, I quote Low’s impression of Png:

“He described Mr Png as mature and the “right candidate” for the by-election.
Mr Low said he has known Mr Png before the 2006 General Election.
He said he observed the way he works for some time and is confident that he’s a person of integrity.
Mr Low said Mr Png is sincere in serving the people. He believes Hougang needs someone like Mr Png, who can connect with its residents.
Mr Low said if elected, Mr Png can contribute to the party’s leadership and parliamentary work.”

The answer logically is simple – because Png wasn’t as good as Yaw so WP decided to send Yaw instead!

Well, the truth is we never know everything even if we have spent a long time with them. Sincerity cannot be judged, it is tested and only seen over time. Integrity can only be revealed over time. Also don’t know what parliamentary work is Png going to support.. maybe be like Pritam, take someone’s else work and present it as his without attributing the source at the time of speech. Damn, you can get sacked from your university course for plagarism…. Or be like Gerald who didn’t know about MX9.. Old news but relevant nonetheless.

Well, the same might be said that we don’t know Desmond Choo, PAP’s candidate, for long. But Desmond, at least, he’s been working hard for more than 1 year while the WP MP was sorely Missing In Action (hence no speech link..)

Actually, I want a peaceful by election. One that is honourable and with integrity. For candidates of quality to fight cleanly and maintain peace amongst the people of Singapore. And for Mr Tan-Jee-Say-I-Don’t-Know-Be-MP-or-President-so-I-Just-Join-Both-Elections-And-Ended-Up-Losing-Both to just stop his press releases. It’s getting *quite* annoying every time he opens his mouth.

Psst. I prefer Desmond Choo. Like his Facebook page here.


World Leaders Falling Short of Expectations.. But in Singapore.. It’s a Different Story

A very notable release was made in the Press 2 days ago.

Business, Political and Religious Leaders Around the World Fall Short of Expectations Ketchum Leadership Communication Monitor Finds Global Economic Crisis Matched by Crisis of Confidence in Leaders and How They Communicate

Just how much did the leaders fall short by? 1%? 5%?

“Leaders from business, political and religious life are falling desperately short of expectations around the world – with Europeans and Americans the most disillusioned – according to a 12-country survey by global communications firm Ketchum. And in fact, more people globally believe leadership will actually get worse in 2012 (31%), compared with anticipating better leadership (27%). Perhaps most concerning, the report found a 28-percentage-point gap between expectations of leaders and their delivery against those expectations.”[1]

That’s a grand 28% drop!

But, did this apply across every country?

Interestingly NO! Yes, I’m sure you knew it coming from the post title. 😀

Comparatively, Singapore fared much better!

I found this article online by Daniel Goh, very well written.

Daniel says:

“Meanwhile, in Singapore…

Compared to other parts of the world, Singaporean political leaders demonstrate the most effective leadership domestically and internationally compared to other types of leaders. Amongst Singaporeans, leadership skills that matter include the ability to handle an issue or crisis calmly (68-percent), to lead by example (66-percent), to communicate in an open and transparent way (65-percent), and also be able to articulate a clear long term vision (63-percent).

Respondents also feel that the most important action any leader needs to take to restore confidence during challenging economic times is to be open and honest about challenges (65-percent). Over half of Singaporeans (57-percent) state that effective leadership from business leaders will be very important in terms of navigating the unstable economic future. Most leaders seem to be moving in the right direction, with more than one third of Singaporeans having greater confidence in business (40-percent) and political leaders (36-percent) navigating through the economic crisis within their country compared to one year ago.

Eight in ten Singaporeans (80-percent) stated that effective communication was extremely important to leadership.

When Singaporeans form their views on leaders and leadership, channels that allow for both visual and audio content, such as broadcast media (48-percent) in-person contact (49-percent) and televised speeches (47-percent) are seen as most credible. Bizarrely, Singaporeans view press releases (57%) as the most credible communication sources when forming opinions about leaders. Online sources such as Twitter (6-percent), blogs (25-percent) and other social media platforms (14-percent) are all much less credible. ”[2]

I have been thinking why social media platforms are less credible. I think it is simply because it started as a platform utilised by the Opposition to spread assumptions, declare unfounded claims and misinterpret statistics if any! The more astute ones will do their homework before jumping on the bandwagon. However, many others retweet and post on FB links and stories that are not true. Over time, even as more people use social media and spread the word from the Opposition camp, it only perpetuates misinformation and serves to erode the credibility of the social media sites. IMHO, one of them was/is Temasek Review…

Mainstream media needs to verify and ensure credibility of news publications. What a shame it would have been if the Editor allowed untruths to be on it hence why.. the Opposition couldn’t get their news on it. See, that’s why they turned to social media.

People listen to reliable and trustworthy leaders, and particularly in a crisis, leaders who are steadfast. Singapore has been able to steer through many challenging circumstances such as economic crisis and health crisis such as SARS because we have leaders who can be trusted, leaders who are steadfast, leaders who are constantly thinking for the future.

Our recent Budget is a case in point. The Opposition would like to claim credit for the shift to a more socialist type of budget but this credit is NOT theirs to claim. The Singapore PAP Government was already raising funds in the earlier years, saving up so that the money can be used when the time is right. If we didn’t save or raise funds through various measures (remember, everyone complained about rising costs of living such as ERP etc) , we would not have enough money for today. With the aging population in sight, this is the right time to release the money. Any earlier, we would have no money for the now or future. Any later, the costs of healthcare could have escalated, the way it has in so many countries.

So what’s my point? Trust the PAP Government.

Not the dubious claims of 1st World Government by the WP, nor the impossible and ridiculous Budget by SDP that will throw the future generations into debt or the silent SPP or wild & incoherent RP.

KJ – Wrong.. Again

Reform Party secretary-general Kenneth Jeyaretnam (KJ) presented misleading information to Wall Street Journal over the facts about his father Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam. Read it here.

Strange, wouldn’t the son know better? Or was the son misinformed? Or was the son KJ , like many of his other posts, just out to misrepresent and misinform? Now, such a man, we cannot allow to be a politician in Singapore. What if our National Interests get misrepresented at a World Forum?

The Government has been compelled, for national integrity sake, to clear his mess. There are many important matters on the country’s agenda such as ensuring a consistent supply of water. It is clear this incompetent political party secretary-general has placed personal interests above country. Such a man… we must ensure he does not become a political leader in Singapore.

An own goal.. in Opposition’s camp

The Singapore political scene has become so interesting I’ve been reading more than posting!

Remember, Singapore’s political system is an election based on political parties and not an individual. This maintains a sense of stability throughout, enabling the majority government to push through policy decisions without wasting much resources of trying to create a consensus, much like what Obama went through.

This came in through a friend’s mail today and thought someone might find it noteworthy too. I don’t know who wrote it but if you did, please drop me a note and a link – I will do the necessary referencing. As all trained students who write essays have been taught lest we are found guilty of plagarising, failed and then expelled! Twice, the opposition have been caught failing to give the original authors credit and in the process, created a false impression that they were the originators of the thoughts.

Check it out here!

Mr LTK chose to score political goals !

LTK built his political career in Hougang, winning the support of residents who courageously voted him into Parliament in 1991. They kept faith with him, standing by him for 20 years till he moved to Aljunied and fielded Yaw Shin Leong as replacement.

The rest, sadly, is history — including Yaw Shin Leong, who was expelled by WP in the wake of allegations about personal issues.

WP clearly knew the implications of what they were doing. Sylvia Lim asked in Parliament: “Does the prime minister not agree that with the Hougang SMC being vacant, there is actually an under-representation of the Hougang voters in this House?”

So if under-represented, who caused it? WP had lots of options, but they decided to sacrifice long-serving Yaw Shin Leong, abandoning the people of Hougang to struggle without an MP. They clearly acted in the interest of their party and not in the interest of the Hougang residents who put the party in power in Hougang. The residents of Hougang are NOT casino chips to be wagered in WP’s political betting. NEITHER should Hougang residents be pawns in WP’s political chess game.

Now there is no MP for Hougang. This didn’t have to happen. Here are 5 ways WP could have done things differently:

1. “Jack Neo” style. Yaw Shin Leong could have hosted a press conference with his wife and apologize in tears, then promise to turn over a new leaf and never, ever do it again. Can even use the words “My Greatest Regret”, just don’t say “My Greatest Regret is not having one of my encounters in Universal Studios”…

2. “Bill Clinton” style. Like Jack Neo, but more statesmanlike. Apologise on TV (or YouTube) with serious charisma. Speech can be scripted, video can be rehearsed until perfect. Can include Bill Clinton phrases like “This has gone on too long, cost too much and hurt too many innocent people…” (but must give credit if copying other people’s words!). Conclude by saying we should not let this distract us from the business of serving the people of Hougang.

3. COI style. WP could have accounted a Committee Of Inquiry to determine the truth of the allegations and investigate processes to see how future problems can be avoided. Can even ask a former civil servant to chair the COI, like Donald Low who deserves some payback after Chen Show Mao copied his article!

4. “Steve Jobs” style. Steve knew how to advise people without interrogating them. During the Monica Lewinsky scandal, he reportedly told Bill Clinton: “I don’t know if you did it, but if so, you’ve got to tell the country.” Even if Yaw Shin Leong was too paiseh to discuss private parts of his life with Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim, they could still have given good advice and guidance.

5. Quiet save-face style. Whatever the truth about Yaw Shin Leong, WP could still have kept him on till the next GE and then retired him quietly, saying “Shin Leong will be stepping down to focus on career / concentrate on other interests” etc.

The people of Hougang are being kicked around in this game of political football. Problem is, WP scored an own goal and the Hougang residents are the ones suffering the loss.

(Extracted from Email circulation: If author reads this, please let me know. Will give due credit)

No fixed time within which by-election must be called: PM Lee

Naturally the papers were thrown wide open this morning on News regarding the by-election.

PM Lee’s answer naturally gave me a little dilemma: Nation or Town?

Electorate size
Nation: about 2.27 million +/- (source: Elections Department)
Town: about 24555 +/- (source: Wikipedia)

24555/ 2270000 = ~0.0108% (nearest 4 figures..)

It is true that there are many urgent issues on the national agenda.
View of Singapore’s economic growth remains cautious at 1-3%. Press release from MTI here.
I must say I’m glad we still have projected growth otherwise.. some of us might be out of job.

Others such as immigration concerns, housing concerns, social concerns, security concerns – just many concerns. Oh and aging population concerns since we might not want eldercare beneath our void decks

Now I have hunger concerns. Time for lunch.

Some people just don’t get it.

The week has barely started when I came to know of a press release made by a Ms Hazel Poa from NSP. Yes, the infamous Nicole Seah Party if you paid attention during the 2011 General Elections.


So here we go.. in Bold…

In the last election, Singaporeans have demonstrated a keen desire for a more balanced political landscape, a wider range of views and more robust debates in Parliament.

You mean more confusing debates? Check it out here!

One important ingredient however remains missing for us to achieve the level of scrutiny and debate desired by Singaporeans – the Freedom of Information Act.

It does not take a FOI Act to initiate a discussion. The debate in Parliament is proof that policies are subjected to scrunity and debate.

It is necessary for opposition parties to have equal access to all information pertinent to the formulation of public policies and laws, unless there are overriding reasons for withholding information, for example where national security may be threatened.  Armed with accurate information, different political parties would then be better equipped to scrutinise each other and hold each other to higher standards.  This will ultimately benefit Singaporeans.

It is necessary for all MPs to be clearly informed of the policies and laws, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE. WP clearly failed to do their research before they went to the Parliamentary debate. They failed to find out what MX9 was all about. They failed to recognise the relationship between private sector and public sector pay and its subsequent impact on the Ministerial Pay debate.

Gerald Giam from WP assumed that the information was withheld when the information was stated online for goodness sake!

Thank you for explaining the formula for MX9 formula. That is not something that we have privy to, the exact formula for MX9. But..so I’ve no choice but to accept that DPM has proposed, that DPM has revealed in this House regarding what the MX9 is pegged to… we are under the understanding that it was more in line with general wage level..” Gerald Giam during Parliamentary Sitting 18 Jan 2012.

The PAP chided WP for not submitting their proposal to the Review Committee on Ministerial Salaries, seeking to further tilt the unequal balance of information in their favour.  If WP is obliged to open their books, but there is no obligation on the part of the Government to provide WP with relevant information they require, no robust debate will ever be possible in Parliament. If withholding proposals from the Review Committee is considered a political manoeuvre, then the denial of a Freedom of Information Act is a political manoeuvre on a much grander scale.

Fact: At every parliament session, MPs can file Parliamentary Questions that require the Government to explain its position or policies.
Hence, this is not an issue of the govt’s obligation to provide relevant information. It is the OBLIGATION OF WP TO ASK WHAT IT WASN’T CLEAR ABOUT.

WP could have easily submitted a question on MX9 if they wanted to but they did not do so. 

Singapore has made some headway in getting a more diverse representation into Parliament.  However, without equal access to information, debates in Parliament will be stifled.  Accurate and accessible information is crucial to developing a Parliament with thought-provoking debates.

MPs have been voted in by the citizens of Singapore to ASK questions that affect their lives. We, mere ordinary citizens, cannot afford to have MPs or Political Parties who do not know what they are talking about! Crafting an entire WP debate on mere assumptions could cost Singapore our future!

Stop your “thought-provoking” dramas and press releases. It’s more like a headache.