Monday, 12 November 2018

PAP’s Biggest Mistake: Dishonorable son leads GE2019



As expected the dishonorable son#1, Lee Hsien Loong, will lead the People’s Action Party again in GE 2019.  Is Lee a suitable person to lead PAP in the coming election?. Will he become Najib No 2? While some may say Lee can be (UMNO) Mahathir No 1 when Mahathir sacked Anwar so it is still very safe for the PAP, maybe losing a few more seats.


The PAP and Lee are trying their luck. But it is bad for the party and perhaps bad for the country too. It seems none of the party members rejecting Lee leading GE 2019. Also, only concerned Singaporeans will think this arrangement is not the internal politics of the PAP.  


A better alternative is Tharman replacing Lee and remains as Prime Minister for a short term and then hands over power to the so-called fourth generation leaders - a situation like Goh Chok Tong.

Tharman, rather than Lee, is the better choice to lead PAP in GE 2019.

While it is too late and the PAP and Lee wants to try their luck. Remember the story of Najib removing Muhyiddin who is now Malaysian Home Minister. Najib removed his deputy that led to the emergence of (Bersatu) Mahathir No 2.  The rest of the story you can see in newspaper and social media everyday.


While such thing will never happen in Singapore as claimed by the PAP or Lee Hsien Loong.


Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong yesterday charted the path forward for the ruling People's Action Party (PAP), saying it must win the next general election convincingly by taking a centrist approach and uniting Singaporeans.
The party has only two years left to prepare for the next election, said Mr Lee, who is PAP secretary-general, as he outlined four things it must do to maintain good politics and keep improving people's lives.
He called on party members to understand and address Singaporeans' concerns, give people hope for the future, encourage inclusive politics and provide good leadership.
https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/pm-lee-sets-out-plan-for-pap-ahead-of-next-ge


Not a word of reform


Lee Hsien Loong will lead a PAP without reform in GE 2019. What are the real meanings of “a centrist approach and uniting Singaporeans.” Are they related to reform?


PAP won the GE2015 by luck - the Lee Kuan Yew factor. Will they be as lucky as 2015 using the Raffles factor in 2019? No one knows. It is a luck and it can turn either way. However, Lee Hsien Loong wants to try his luck again.


Lee is now a controversial figure, without a mind of reform.


While for PAP to survive and Singapore to advance, an urgent need of reform is needed.


Source: Yahoo Singapore
George Yeo called for a PAP reform. Have we seen any changes since 2011?


No.


Lee Hsien Loong prefers luck than reform. And so, the outcome will be….

Who carry Lee Kuan Yew’s values

In GE 2019, voters will also need to decide who really carries the values of Lee Kuan Yew - dishonorable son or others, including Lee siblings.

Today’s PAP under Lee Hsien Loong is different from the PAP in the early days. Do voters still believe Lee Hsien Loong as the promoter and protector of our funding values?

A reform is needed to restore the fundamental values of Singapore, 
the spirit of our national pledge and our Constitutions.  


#1 https://www.straitstimes.com/politics/pm-rebuts-dr-lee-wei-ling-over-claim-that-he-abused-power-to-mark-lkys-death-anniversary

Saturday, 10 November 2018

人民行动党僵化接班制度,严重冲击新加坡建国、李光耀精神的延续。


韩国瑜的崛起证明国民党的僵化接班人计划彻底失败,看看吴志扬就是一个典型的失败例子。巫统、马华背离马来西亚的建国精神,拉曼精神以及宪法精神,变天成了合理的结局。


人民行动党领导新加坡超过60年,从第一代传到第三代,即将进入第四代领导。这种PAP党内代代相传,吃定新加坡人的僵硬政权转移,现在正面临严重的挑战。

为什么,我们一定要接受这种代代相传的PAP制度?并且,问也不问,题也不提,这些所谓制度化的接班人、领导人,是否能延续、持续发展新加坡的建国精神、好的李光耀精神。

建国精神反映在《新加坡信约》里面:
我们是新加坡公民,
誓愿不分种族、言语、宗教,团结一致,
建设公正平等的民主社会,
并为实现国家之幸福、繁荣与进步,共同努力。
从第一代到第四代,我们看到的是倒退的民主,公正平等离我们渐行渐远,一个总统选举的身份问题,如何做到种族、言语、宗教,团结一致?新加坡建国精神在僵化的接班人制度下,如何做到持续性发展?

建国精神维护不了,李光耀精神也同样维持不了。或许,剩下的只是不好,负面的李光耀精神:限制民主自由的发展,高压治理,失败的文化教育。。

什么是好的李光耀精神?

新加坡折射了李光耀的特点:高效、廉洁、不感情用事,并富有创造性、前瞻性和务实精神。
https://cn.nytimes.com/asia-pacific/20150323/c23leekuanyew/

PAP制度化的接班人制度,能否继续落实李光耀精神?这真的是一个很大的问号?李显龙为何被弟妹称为dishonorable son?这里面就包含李光耀精神的争论。弟妹们认为他们才是落实李光耀精神的真正执行人,那李显龙算什么?李显龙真的能够执行和落实李光耀精神吗?

历史告诉我们,尤其是朝代的更替,就证明自己的子孙、后代无法落实立国者的精神。运气好的,出来了几个功臣,中兴一下。就正如,李光耀亲孙子李绳武说的一样:新加坡不要下一个李总理。这是否意味着,李家后代已经承认新加坡建国精神,李光耀精神,需要外人来传承?

而这个传承的工作,PAP僵硬的,教条式的接班人、领导人制度,是否能够胜任?

如果不能够胜任,就要有PAP僵化的制度外,寻找答案。

因此,在吴作栋新书的推介会上,李总理强调,领导层的自我更新和建立具凝聚力的团队,应该作为我国的政治规范并加以巩固。这不仅仅是物色合适的接班人,也是组建优良的团队来领导新加坡。(早报)

李显龙以及PAP试图将这个僵硬的接班人制度“作为我国的政治规范并加以巩固”, 对于新加坡来说,很可能变成发展、发挥新加坡建国精神,李光耀精神的一大阻碍,一大绊脚石。

因为,这个僵硬的接班人制度是建立在一党独大的基础上。PAP只是晓得在党内分配这块领导人的蛋糕,而忽略了民情、民主、民众基础。即使党内选出新人领导,这也不过是PAP维护蛋糕的保卫战,不是延续、持续建国精神、李光耀精神的选项。新加坡人民如必须要看清这个事实。

Saturday, 3 November 2018

Swiss living rather than seat warming in Goh’s new book


Instead of disclosing his seat warming experience, Goh Chok Tong should discuss his failed Swiss living for Singaporeans.   

Seat warming is his personal experience. Swiss living is for Singaporeans.  This is the tall order for politicians who really want to improve life and living standard of Singaporeans.

Personally, Goh has achieved his personal goal.

None of his objectives talk about Swiss living or in a general way, the life of Singaporeans.  During Goh Administration, our economy was growing, GDP per capita also increasing but not living standard.

It is important for Singaporeans to know why we are NOT able to achieve Swiss standard of living. Goh promotes Swiss living. He should explain why we cannot make it - why Singaporeans cannot enjoy the kind of life like Swiss.  

Is this due to our one-party democracy, checks and balances?

Is this due to our culture? Does Switzerland maintain and preserve their cultural roots better than us? Singapore ends up “bad English, bad Mandarin (Chinese)”, perhaps also bad Malay and bad Tamil.

By avoiding tall order question like Swiss living, Goh only concerns about himself - how a poor boy made it to the top. While the situation now and future is very different - inequality, rich-poor gap, education gap, etc.  This is the big picture that makes Swiss living so remote.

“Worry before the people and enjoy after the people.”
When Goh brought up the idea of Swiss living, he expressed his concern of Singaporeans - life of ordinary people.
 
Be concerned about the affairs of state before others, and enjoy comfort after others.
 
While Goh only completes the first part - only showing concerns.  This is not enough.

Indeed, he seems to enjoy his life before others and his comment on mediocre people proves it.


Goh is now more interested to raise ministers’ pay rather than his concern of ordinary Singaporeans.

It is not a wooden question.  
“Worry before the people and enjoy after the people.”

It is a real problem in Singapore:
“Worry after the people and enjoy before the people.”

Wednesday, 31 October 2018

白色迎亲的恐怖-离不开PAP思维。



白色迎亲的恐怖-离不开PAP思维。

一身白衣白裤来迎亲,代表了什么?

或许,这是少部分年轻新加坡人的思维,也或许,这是大部分新加坡年轻人的看法。无论如何,这代表了一种人民行动党的思维,亏欠李光耀的想法,把自己束缚在一党独大的环境里,而忽略了改变的可能。

照这样的原理推算,如果只是少部分年轻国人有这个看法、观点,那么,在野党就有希望。如果,这是大部分年轻国人的想法、做法,那么,在野党就只能慢慢等,或许还要做出更大的牺牲。

从表面的数据和报道看,新加坡年轻人好像跟其他国家,不论是发达的欧美国家,还是我们亚细安邻居比较,都是被动的冷感动物。我们没有一股热情,甚至对于社会上发生的不平,如:贫富不均,医药卫生等课题漠不关心。

这样的年轻人越多,离不开PAP思维,就不可能造就变天。

年轻人是社会的动力,而PAP却成功的阻碍了这股动力的发展、发挥。而这样的一种背景产生出所谓的第四代PAP领导人。他们的素质,有些经过一届国会,有些经过二届国会,已经让我们看到他们的水准。如果,年轻国人有激情、有冲劲、有政治理想,那么这批还在在学习中的第四代行动党领导们,还有招架的力量吗?

年轻人继续停留在对李光耀的怀念,PAP的治国模式,对于行动党来说,当然是好事,但是,对于新加坡来说,却是一大坏事。缺乏就事论事,据理力争,热情,激情的理想,新加坡的长期持续性成长将会是一个问号,不只如此,我们连问政,公开透明的要求也没有了。难怪,行动党的一些元老,如许通美,不得不发声点出没有最低工资的问题,主流媒体偏见报道。

但是,这些元老,如陈清木等人,就只能走到这里,下去的路,还是要依靠年轻人接棒。而如果年轻的接棒人,是穿着白衣白裤来迎亲,迎娶美丽的选民,那将是一个怎么样的新加坡???

年轻人,你希望白衣白裤陪着你过一生吗?你的将来是白茫茫的一片吗?还是要自己追求自己的幸福,自己走出自己的道路来。。。

Saturday, 27 October 2018

Singapore’s Public Financial Management is far below IMF, International standard.


Low press freedom, high inequality, and now questionable fiscal responsibility and checks and balances in public financial management.

    
In Module 11: Institutional Oversight of the Budget and PFM of Public Financial Management course by edX@IMF, it is stated that:

The government is in charge of preparing and implementing the budget, but it needs to be accountable to independent institutions. Which institutions are involved in oversight, and support fiscal responsibility? We discuss the roles of Supreme Audit Institutions, Fiscal Councils, and the Legislature (parliaments). You will also learn how oversight models vary around the world, and what is required to ensure that these institutions carry out their functions. Most notable are the requirement for independence of these institutions, timeliness of reporting, and the ability to interact with civil society.

Although Singapore is a financial centre and a good partner of International Monetary Fund,  we score poorly in Supreme Audit Institutions, Fiscal Councils, and the Legislature
(parliaments). Our Auditor-General is not independent. We do not have Fiscal Council. While our parliament is almost a one-party rule.  

Even though in paper, Singapore under PAP government performs well in budgeting and auditing?, if we consider the Institutional Oversight of the Budget and PFM, the roles of  Supreme Audit Institutions, Fiscal Councils, and the Legislature (parliaments), in the longer term, we will face sustainability problems. There is certainly a lack of independent bodies and citizens engagement in checking the fiscal responsibility.    

Let explain Supreme Audit Institutions, Fiscal Councils, and the Legislature (parliaments) using IMF language:

Supreme Audit Institutions (SAI) are independent agencies responsible for auditing government revenue and expenditure. There are several models of external audit: the two main types are the judicial model and the parliamentary model, and there are other variations.
The effectiveness of SAIs relies on several criteria: scope and type of external audit; characteristics of the institution; publication, timeliness, quality and follow-up on SAIs' reports

Fiscal Councils are independent, non-partisan bodies that assess government's fiscal policies, plans, rules and performance against macroeconomic objectives. Most fiscal councils today are in advanced economies, and there is growing interest in emerging markets and developing economies.

The legislature reviews and approves the budget, reviews its execution and at year-end, holds the executive accountable. The capacity of the legislature to play a role at each stage of the budget process is influenced by political, organizational, and institutional factors.
Legislature’s power to amend the budget is crucial. It is linked with the quantity and the quality of information the legislature receives and sufficient time to review the draft budget is necessary for an effective review of the draft budget. At year-end, the Legislature reviews the budget implementation, to assess the compliance of the budget execution with the original approved budget law.

IMF also stresses the importance of Legitimacy of Public Participation in Public Financial Management:

Civil society and citizens interact directly with public authorities to design, implement and review budget and fiscal policies and there is a growing international consensus on the involvement of citizens in Public Financial Management.
Public participation in the budget process relies on several channels and tools, that are complementary and should be combined.
Public participation in PFM still needs to be improved. Madagascar Citizens Budget or Social Audits in India are experiences introduced by these countries to enhance public participation.
Several criteria should be met to ensure public participation effectiveness: an inclusive and transparent process, sufficient time allowed in the budget cycle, informed citizens and incorporation of public inputs in the budget process.

Do you think the PAP government will agree with Citizens Budget and Social Audit?  

[Fiscal transparency]
Fiscal transparency, or in other words, openness about public finances, has gained prominence over the past two decades. In this module, we discuss fiscal transparency in detail: its main elements, its benefits, and the challenges it raises. We also offer a tour of the latest initiatives towards increased transparency, including the revised IMF Fiscal Transparency Code, the OECD’s Principles of Budgetary Governance, the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Framework (PEFA), the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative Standard (EITI), the Open Budget Survey, and the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency (GIFT). We will analyze how different actors — the government, citizens, international organizations and financial markets — contribute to fiscal transparency, and hear the views of various stakeholders in the fiscal transparency area.
[Difference between fiscal transparency and budget transparency]
This video presents a general definition and distinguishes between fiscal transparency and budget transparency. Fiscal transparency has a wider definition which includes all public assets, liabilities, risk and contingencies.


Clearly, this means Singapore’s fiscal transparency should include Temasek, GIC, and all state-owned enterprises.   
And most importantly, fiscal responsibility means institutional oversight, public participation and fiscal transparency.


[Lack of transparency]
This section concludes with a look at three examples of lack of non-transparency together with an explanation on how a lack of transparency may affect important fiscal indicators.




Najib as a reminder


In summary, Najib government is a good example of the many problems mentioned in the above videos. We cannot only look at the budget alone. We must consider fiscal transparency.  Malaysia during Najib Adminstration already had a strong opposition, having more popular votes, however, Najib could still control and manipulate the fiscal accounts.

Just imagine how serious it can be for Singapore.  

The lack of fiscal transparency, lack of public participation and lack of a strong opposition will cause long-term sustainability problems for Singapore.

It looks OK now but how about our children and future generations.