Wednesday, 31 August 2011

Back to square one, the only unifying Singapore President is a non-contested and Parliament appointed President




Yes. Perhaps, the Workers’ Party is right. Perhaps, JBJ was right when he opposed the Elected President proposal.  The power of checks and balances should go back to the Parliament and there is no point of continued debating the role of the Elected President.

The more debates on the role of EP, the more political the post of EP will be. 

The New Parliament will be sitting in October. The PAP government should seriously consider abolishing the EP and go back to the original ceremonial role of the President. Both the government and President Tony Tan have hinted that there will be some changes as regards to the role of the EP.

Why don’t take this opportunity to abolish the EP and return the power of the EP back to the Parliament?

We only know the good points of the PAP government, for example economic growth and in fact, they have made policy mistakes too.  EP was one of them that not only it has failed to unite the people but divide the people further. EP is created to protect the country’s reserve and institutions just in case a bad government is elected.

Who is to decide the definition of bad government that will never listen to the voice of the people?  Is it the PAP or the voters? Obviously, the voters are responsible not the PAP.  A PAP endorsed President who only received 35% of the votes will have a hard time to unify the people if not divided them further.

Singapore voters have become more mature than before as shown in GE2011 and PE2011. Because of the maturity, the outdated EP is no more suitable for today’s Singapore.  The EP was designed for some special reasons more than 20 years ago and the reasons are no more valid today.  Any alterations, changes and refining will still make EP a political one for political purpose.

Can we deny that all candidates in PE2011 have no political agenda? Have any of them received no support from political parties? 

It is said to be non-partisan and neutral.  But without party machinery, no candidate can win the Presidential Election.  Tan Kin Lian was the weakest link so he lost his deposit. It is created in favour of a government endorsed candidate but it is now back firing itself.  Voters blamed the PAP supported candidate for all the wrong doings of the PAP.

A non-politician has little chance to be elected too. He has no power base like Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bock in the north and west of Singapore respectively. How can an EP have his own power base in a particular area in Singapore? And he supposes to serve the whole country. It divides the country further. Consistently, in future, whoever wins the race will have to have a power base.  This will make the contest even more politically.

It also denies minority to be an EP in future. This is a very bad development for our multi-racial society.  Past examples had shown that a non Chinese can serve as a unifying President, a People President!

The EP cannot safeguard the reserve as long as the government has two-third majority in the Parliament. If a President elected by Singapore voters cannot exercise his rights to protect the reserve, and then what is the point of electing him?

If he exercises his rights, he is considered as the second power centre.  The government can even remove him from office.

So, a contested EP has no power but indeed divides the country, divides the people further.  It is better to take away the ‘E’ from EP and return to its original ceremonial role.  

Tuesday, 30 August 2011

陈如斯不是赢家,不是输家,更像牺牲家




《点几盏灯为乾坤作福,打一声鼓代天地行威》

在林世雄的小说“林则徐‘里,上一联是林父所作,而下一联则是林则徐的回答。这显示也预示,林则徐在往后当官时,是本着为人民福利来做事的。到底,林则徐禁烟是成功还是失败?对他个人的仕途来说,可以说是失败的。但是,对于提醒人们鸦片烟毒及其危害来说,却是起了很大的警觉作用。可是在最后,清朝有没有成功禁烟,林则徐的牺牲成功与否,答案应该是没有。

林则徐个人做出牺牲,但是清朝政府还是无法成功禁烟,理由很多,也很复杂。但是,林则徐认为自己已经尽了力,因此,死而无悔。清朝政府的无能禁烟,在在也说明,他们没有从人民的利益着想,只是为维护本身的政权着想,为一部分高官的利益着想。难怪,国势日落,最终走向大清皇朝的结束。

陈如斯当然不可能拿来和林则徐相比,但是,从精神层面来说,陈如斯提出一些争议性的课题,却是值得人民深思的。他提出的道德,制衡,贫富,公平分配国家财富,照顾弱势群体,不领高薪,注重国内发展等等问题,不也是从国人的利益做出发吗?

反对派中的黑角色

个人来说,陈如斯两次参选,5月的国会选举和8月的总统选举都失败,接下来,如果再度参选5年后的大选也可能面对失败的命运。不是他好不好的问题,而是,他的行动派反对党角色,已经在主流媒体的造型运动下,成了反对派中的黑角色。在新加坡50年来的政治中,黑角色翻身的机会不高。或许,社交媒体能为他平反,但是,这需要一些时间。

因此,他很可能就是在扮演燃烧自己,照亮别人的角色。反对党中的白角色,采取温和作风的候选人,就能利用这个机会,进入国会。总统选举结果证明工人党(也或许包括人民党) 走的中间路线对将来的大选选情有利。因此,在上文中,我提到'从政治层面看,工人党或许是这次总统选举的赢家'。因为,陈如斯和民主党是协助和替工人党打天下的,扮演坏人的角色。

那么,这次总统选举,陈如斯个人,和支持他的民主党和团结党,到底是赢还是输呢?

在新加坡,25%是失败者,不是造王者

能够获得25%的全国选票,如果在欧洲比例制民主国家中,即使不是执政团队之一,也可以算是造王者了。但是,在新加坡一票领先得胜的选举制度下,陈如斯当然是失败者。最多,也只能说是不输也不赢。

如果硬要说赢,那么赢的是最少还有25%的基本盘。从这里出发,再做冲刺。但是,如何脱离反对党的黑脸角色,在新加坡一对一选举中,取得50.1%的选票,真是一大挑战。反对党的游离票,可以得到,但是,行动党的游离票,谈何容易?

陈如斯一开始就错了吗?站错了位置?

新加坡的政治现实是一旦被行动党贴上反对党的黑角色,对抗,激进的角色,真是跳进黄河也洗不清。陈如斯等人在一开始加入民主党,就已经被贴上这个反政府的角色,一个为反对而反对的角色。

这不是民主党的错,也不是陈如斯等人的错。或许是他没有认清新加坡政治的现实面,或许他认为新加坡人已经做出改变,尤其是在网上,更是呈现出一片赞美之声。但是,新加坡的政治是慢半拍的,人家台湾,韩国已经在20年前就开始的民主运动,现在可能还正在新加坡发生呢。

陈如斯早在当民主党候选人时,就已经知道这个问题,他希望朝中间靠拢,他甚至说徐顺全已经做出改变,不搞对抗。大选后,他甚至提议民主党和团结党合作合并的可能,他要改变本身和民主党的形象,但是,都不成功。为时已迟。

入党三个月,已经是够‘黑’了

在检讨总统选举败选原因时,他认为,自己时间不够,无法向选民解释他的立场,他是想向选民说明,他不是主流媒体说的那么激进,喜欢对抗。但是,黑脸一旦被定型,行动党和主流媒体还让你翻身吗?局势的发展,也做不到改变黑脸的机会。

即使入党三个月,已经足够时间被定型了。更何况,陈如斯还代表民主党参加5月的大选。如果,不认同民主党,为何要加入民主党?

陈如斯的未来政治路途,还不清楚,他说他要和支持者讨论,再做决定。但是,夹着总统选举的25%支持票,他还是能够号召一批人重新加入民主党或团结党,或是自立新党。一个最重要的决定是如何摆脱对抗角色,激进角色,让选民认为他是走中间路线的人。

重新定位,谈何容易?

这是重新定位,重新自我改造,树立新形象的问题。除非,能够向苹果电脑一样,推出新产品,一系列i-产品,这谈何容易,世界上又可有另一个苹果电脑呢? 陈如斯要改变选民对他的形象,谈何容易?

另一个改变是形势改变,转而对陈如斯这样的人有利,例如,经济太坏,治国无方,人民的怒气已经到了无法忍受的地步,需要一个全面而非局部的改变,即是革命时刻的到来。正常情形下,这种局面应该不会在新加坡发生,新加坡的改变是渐进式的,而非革命性的。

民主党和团结党的输赢

民主党输赢的问题,和陈如斯相似,基本上25%就是基本盘。可以有向上发展的空间,但是,要进入行动党的游离选民的范围,阻力很大,即使,有很好的候选人,很可能无法达到50.1%的目标。民主党最近的中委选举,好像并没有吸纳温和中间路线人物,是否能够脱离旧的黑脸角色,看来不容易。

大力支持陈如斯的团结党,在总统选举中是输还是赢。这个一向没有什么主见的政党,一直在中间左右游走,这回却向激进,左边靠,让人不甚理解。或者,这会导致该党部分党员出走,和陈如斯组成新的政党。赢的一面或许是,提高知名度,和新鲜度,这和以前团结党路线有些不同。但是,总统选举后,看来它还是走回老路。总统选举的激情或许只是一时的火花。

Monday, 29 August 2011

There is always a need to have people like Jee Say and Kin Lian to maintain the ‘biodiversity’ in Singapore



I voted with my heart and has no regret even Jee Say did not win the race. In Singapore, we really need people like Jee Say and Kin Lian to act differently from the main stream and provide alternative ideas and views.

Biodiversity is the degree of variation of life forms within a given ecosystem, biome, or an entire planet. Biodiversity is a measure of the health of ecosystems. (Source: Wikipedia)

Hence, biodiversity of ideas and views is the measurement of the health of our politics and society. 

If there is no biodiversity in our society, in Singapore, sooner or later we will be extinct because we will be too homogeneous and lack of anti-body mechanism.  However, political diversity under the government propaganda has always become a bad word, likes confrontational, anti-unity, and of course, anti-establishment.

Contributions or sacrifices

If not because of Jee Say and Kin Lian, voters will not be aware (and concern) of moral, value, and responsibility.  Their contributions in PE2011 have helped to push the pro-PAP voters towards the central; this is why Cheng Bock is getting so many votes, a surprise not only to himself and also to the PAP.

However, I am always uncomfortable with Cheng Bock even he is the second best and only lost by 0.3%. This is because some academics have suggested that the PAP had in fact achieved 70% of the total votes when the two Dr Tans combined their votes in this PE. If this is true, then we have to re-examine whether the 65% voted against Dr Tony Tan is a real discontent of the people.  No wonder, Dr Tony Tan said the vote was decisive.

Two whites, one white or market testing

If this is true, how independence can Cheng Bock be? So, voters were voting two whites, one is pure white and the other is not so pure.

The PAP is testing the market with a new right to central product – Cheng Bock.  It seems they have achieved their aim.  Voters like and prefer this new product and in the next election, more Cheng Bock type of PAP candidates will appear. And they will recruit more ‘independent’ minded candidates rather than pro-establishment candidates in the next GE.

No chance for Jee Say in next GE

I feel sorry for Jee Say. Being a Mohism (Mozi) type of person, he would have to do more sacrifices for Singapore.  He may not even be elected as an MP in the next GE because of his negative image published in the main stream media.

Bad name

Bad name a candidate is always a strategy for the PAP. They have systematically been doing so since independence. JBJ, Francis Seow, Chee Soon Juan, Tang Liang Hong, and now Tan Jee Say.  Besides JBJ, have any one of them being elected before?

It will be hard for Jee Say to change his ‘bad’ name to ‘good’ name under the present circumstances. As Jee Say said one of the reasons that he failed in PE2011 was he could not reach out to the old voters.  I have mentioned in my post on the non-English speaking voters as king makers in this PE.

I believe most of Dr Tony Tan’s votes are from this group of voters (who should also include new citizens). And those English speaking, better educated PAP supporters were supporting Cheng Bock.

Always maintain 35% die-hard supporters

When the PAP realises the non-English speaking voters are declining, they quickly replace the drop by increasing the number of new citizens. Therefore, they can continue to maintain 35% of die-hard supporters.
    
However, for Jee Say, it will be very hard to get 50.1% in a one-to-one parliament contest. The other 25% moderate pro-PAP supporters will not vote for him.  In addition, there is another 10% pro-opposition voters will not choose Jee Say even he tries to change his image.

Quite sad but this is a political reality in Singapore.  Perhaps, Jee Say is ahead of his time in political idealism in Singapore. This has to take time, may be after 2 or 3 more GEs later, then Singapore voters can accept Jee Say.  Otherwise, to change the mindset of people in Singapore, some big changes in the PAP something like the Jasmine revolution will need to take place.

As far as Jee Say is happy with what he is doing even being projected as a confrontational figure and face with unfair treatment in the main stream media, he should continue to pursue his cause as there are a quarter of population supporting him.

Good luck for Jee Say and Kin Lian.  Thank you we know you have already tried your best.

  

Sunday, 28 August 2011

从政治层面看,工人党或许是这次总统选举的赢家


这个说法,好像有点无厘头。不是说,总统选举是非政治性的竞争吗?怎么工人党这个并无直接涉入这次选举的政党,会是赢家呢?恰好就是这个局外人的身份,反而捞到旁观者清的好处。

首先,工人党是唯一没有在这次总统选举中下注的政党。工人党不赞成民选总统制,认为应该恢复到以前的国会委任制度。行动党和其他主要反对党都有参与这次总统选举,尤其是民主党,团结党和人民党。

行动党底牌进一步暴露出来

行动党下的注是陈庆炎,虽然胜利了,但有如败了,得票只有35%。底牌给人看清楚了,什么地方强,什么地方弱,已经再度暴露出来了。虽然不能说支持率从5月大选的60%降到35%。但是,说行动党的支持率已经跌到50%以下,应该不为过分。

还记吗?工人党在5月大选的整体竞选的23个选区的平均得票率是46%。这是反对党中最高的。所以,在这些选区,工人党和行动党的得票会是非常接近,只要工人党能够吸引到好像陈硕茂这样的人才,胜选的机会非常高。

下次大选,工人党肯定会在东部继续扩张领土,参选的选区也会超过5月大选的数目。这是他们朝向长期执政的计划的一部分工作。同时,这要看吸纳人才的速度。林瑞莲在出任阿裕尼-后港市镇会主席时说,她希望招收更多人才为工人党效劳。因此,下次大选,参选人数肯定会有所增加。如果,以中选人数来说,工人党在5月的选举中,中选的比率为26% 6/23),如果包括非选区议员,则高达接近35%

背着工人党旗帜参加选举,虽然不一定能够胜选,但是,有机会中选却是不争的事实。如果你是有分量的候选人,又要走中庸路线,不想穿上闪电的白衣,那蓝衣最适合。

陈清木的路线接近工人党

除了陈如斯和陈庆炎以外,走中庸路线的其他两位候选人是陈清木和陈钦亮 (虽然有时激进,但并非完全激进)。由于陈钦亮得票太低,所以,以陈清木为中间路线的代表。

工人党的做法是在体制内竞争,没有挑战宪法或进行体制外的抗争。虽然,不满集选区制度,不满选区划分,不满建屋局和人协,但是,基本,只要是体制内的竞争,工人党就以体制内的规矩来竞争。阿裕尼集选区的竞争就是一个例子。

陈清木的做法和选战策略有着工人党的影子,有点像。他没有挑战总统在宪法下的职权。甚至在一些敏感课题,如内安法,总统的薪金,储备的监督,都没有挑战现有制度的想法,都是按着宪法,法律走。

还有,他们同样有着成熟和稳重的特色。

工人党还有一个不好听的外号:行动党有意栽培的反对党。因为,它没有为反对而反对,没有挑战制度的做法,使到它看起来,好像一个没有抗争力的政党。而这种做法,看起来是行动党能够接受,人民也能够接受的角色。

行动党栽培的反对党 这个外号好还是不好?

‘行动党有意栽培的反对党’,像不像陈清木的角色,反过来说,如果陈清木当选总统,行动党或多或少也能接受,新加坡选民也能接受。如果,有一天,工人党当选做政府,行动党也无话可说,选民也能够接受。

难怪,在一次研讨会上,工人党议员毕丹星说出,一旦行动党和工人党都没有取得国会的大多数,两党有可能合作组成联合政府,而不是和其他反对党组成联合政府。虽然,后来,毕丹星做出腾清,但是,从理念来说,可能工人党和行动党的理念更为接近。反而和其他反对党不接近。

怕输的中间选民选中庸之道
                 
这个理念上的接近,有其好处,也有坏处。好处是,选民既然敢投陈清木,也敢投工人党,即使让工人党执政,也不会离中庸路线太远。坏处是这个外号,实在不好听,有如走狗。

新加坡选民的怕输心里,在这次总统选举中也得到证明。不喜欢陈庆炎的行动党色彩,但是,又害怕陈如斯的过于激进,因此,陈清木的中间路线最适合。如果,这种怕输心理继续维持到下次大选,工人党的机会是很高的。

况且,行动党的一个致命的地方是,人才难寻,很难想象它能够找到足够的议员人选,和工人党硬拼。如果,继续拿像杨荣文这样人才和工人党硬拼,两败俱伤,反而让一些小的反对党得利。这个算盘根本就不化算。因此,未来行动党的主力战将将不可能放在工人党竞选的选区。

工人党和陈清木的东西新加坡合作

工人党势力范围是在岛国东部。陈清木在总统选举中,在东部没有绝对优势,有些地方,甚至陈庆炎和陈如斯领先。但是,在西部地区,陈清木的得票却处于领先的地步。这表示,工人党的支持者没有绝对的支持陈清木。如果,总统选举选前,工人党暗地呼吁它的46%支持者全体投陈清木,今天的陈总统很可能不是陈庆炎。

在没有工人党的指引下,工人党支持者把票投给了陈如斯和陈清木。很可能陈如斯还多一点。不然,陈如斯不可能获得25%的票,因为,他在西部的得票基本上低于25%

如果工人党能够获得陈清木支持者的合作和支持,工人党的西进计划,可能有望提早完成。虽然说总统选举是非政治性的,但是,用人和策略,还是一样的。这股力量,不用白不用,久而久之,也会消失。况且,陈清木和工人党理念上没有冲突。

这只是一个构想,需要政治智慧来完成。

另一个获利的反对党是人民党。该党的两位中委力挺陈清木。因此,据说,陈清木在波东巴西区领先其他候选人。人民党也是走中间路线,但是,由于地盘太小,(甚至没有地盘),因此,即使,陈清木支持者跟它合作,效果也不大。

至于陈如斯,和支持他的民主党和团结党,到底是赢还是输呢?下文再讨论。

Saturday, 27 August 2011

Walkover is no more relevant to Singapore politics, be it General Election or Presidential Election



2011 is a wonderful year for Singapore politics.  It has kicked out the dirty word of walkover and finally voters in Tanjong Pagar have the chance to cast their votes today.

Full contest is common and walkover is unusual.  This is the norm.  However, this is not the case for Singapore.  Since independence, the PAP government has been very proud of the walkover achievement. 

In almost all the past elections before 2011, they have laughed at the oppositions not being able to produce quality candidates to contest all the parliament seats, as well as securing the certificate of eligibility for Presidential Election.

It will be hard to imagine there will be walkover in any future election, GE or PE.  And to win the election, more qualified candidates have to step forward, either from the pro- or anti-establishment camp.

It is a very good sign for Singapore democracy which has become more matured, responsive and participated.  It now involves the whole voting population.

If there is an election, there is a hope.  More candidates are willing to stand in elections despite of some unfavourable election rules and systems, like GRC, COE, NTUC, boundary changes, PA, RC, CCC etc. Even the system may not be fair to all, but this year GE and PE have proved that there is chance for non-establishment candidates to win.  Yes, there is a possibility to win against the establishment candidates.

The breakthrough in a GRC for Workers’ Party and getting a COE for Presidential Election are major achievements for Singapore, not only for the oppositions.

Congratulation Singapore, we are back to normal. Congratulation to Singapore voters who have finally realised they have the right to vote and vote for some one they like.

We have entered the politics of diversification but not necessary a divided country.  Only the PAP that is used to monopoly will think diversification is bad for the country. 

Let respect the decisions of the voters. 

Thursday, 25 August 2011

行动党政府不会因为总统选举结果而倒台,但是我国政治版图将会出现变数


  
冷静日,戴起眼镜看清楚陈庆炎的真面目,投票日,寻找一颗代表人民的良心。不论谁当选总统,政府依然强大,因此,选民应该勇敢投选陈如斯的爱心.

新加坡分裂了,会更加分裂吗?

5月份大选后,我国政局出现四六分。如果陈庆炎当选,分裂将会加深。因为,陈庆炎代表没有改变,李总理大选后的100天新政,并无法平息人民的怨气,一个没有大改变的政府,将会加深人民的分裂。陈庆炎的当选,将会让行动党政府认为,他们可以继续我行我素。

如果,四位候选人得票很平均,是不是会出现四种不同的声音,大分裂中出现小分裂呢?但是,先不要认定,分裂一定是不好的。这样的大,小分裂,不是更能代表民意吗?

除非陈庆炎高票当选,这表示人民同意行动党的做法和改变。
目前,看来,这个情形很不可能。险胜的机会比较高。陈庆炎昨天在群从大会上也表示,自己有可能落选。不知道,这是真心话,还是,选战策略。

冒出来的阿裕尼事件,令人更加反感行动党

新加坡人民一向来认为政府不公平对待反对党,没有尊重民意,阿裕尼事件,更加凸显行动党输了阿裕尼,还在搞小动作,为难反对党(工人党)。这件事在这个时候发生,对浮动选民有一定的影响。

行动党政府,不知是有意还是无意让这件事暴露出来,显示出自己的霸道行为。工人党选在这个时候把事情曝光,不也在间接协助陈如斯和陈钦亮吗?

不要被总理吓到

陈庆炎一直在打他的经济财政牌,大谈我国经济将会遇到经济不景的可能,而他最能配合政府把国家治好,克服新加坡所将面对的困难。政府也配合他的说法,好像大难来临,非陈庆炎配合行动党政府不可。

李总理还警告说,作为一个面对经济风暴时可能翻船的小国,新加坡只有把经济和政治搞好,确保政治的稳定与经济的和谐,才能继续保持繁荣与强盛。

好像只有陈庆炎加上政府,就能确保新加坡的政治经济不会翻船。千万不要被这个言论吓倒,而不懂得如何投票。

选举不涉及政治行吗?

我国民选总统选举,已经被定义为一场非政治性的选举。但是,有可能吗?行动党不愿献身,但是,总理公开挺陈庆炎,陈庆炎的背后,都充满了行动党的影子,选民都知道,选陈庆炎,就是选行动党。这种关系,洗也洗不清。陈庆炎就是行动党的代言人。而陈庆炎在不同场合的演说,发表意见,也都在维护行动党,而且坚持维持现状。

其他候选人,虽然也或多或少有行动党和反对党的支持。其中,陈如斯,获得最多的反对党的支持。

因此,说这场总统选举,没有政治色彩,很难令人信服。

工人党支持者,情归何处?

行动党不愿正面出来,因为害怕选民反感。但是,工人党由于基于本身反对民选总统制度,也要抽身事外,但是,工人党支持者,也要出来投票,那么,他们是支持陈如斯还是陈钦亮或甚至陈清木呢?

死硬派行动党支持者当然选陈庆炎,死硬派工人党支持者会选谁呢?这会直接影响到陈如斯和陈钦亮的选票。

这是一场很奇怪的选举,执政党不愿出面,害怕失去更多的票,国会第一大反对党,又有一点抵制总统选举的味道,也没有指引支持者投向何方。

新加坡政治局势新局面

这次选举最积极投入的是较小的反对党。主要是民主党和团结党。他们主要支持陈如斯。这两个政党在5月大选最失意。得了选票却没有议员。从政治生存来说,他们是没有地盘的政党。如果,能在总统选举中,带来影响和带动人气,对他们来说,是有利的。

他们(结合起来)也很可能成为新加坡政治版图中的第三势力。或许,还可能出现第四(陈钦亮),和第五股(陈清木行动党的分支)势力。这是一个有趣的发展。这不单影响到民主党和团结党的现有领导层,也影响到行动党和工人党的发展。

因此,一场非政治的总统选举,带来的政治震旦,可能并不比
5月份的大选来的小。如果,陈如斯当选,这第三势力不是有了地盘了吗?虽然总统不理政治,但是,不能喝咖啡吗?

行动党当初让陈如斯出来选总统,虽然意在分散选票,让陈钦亮和陈如斯都不能当选,但是,这不也壮大陈如斯的势力吗?

真是,人算不如天算。无论如何,基于改变的理由,陈庆炎是不适合担任总统的。一个高智慧的人,并不一定会有爱心。经济越面临挑战,我们越需要一个关怀人民的总统,或者是一个替人民出声的总统。

A divided Singapore is looking for a unifying heart and voice as President.


When we enter the polling stations on 27 August, one thing for sure is we are NOT electing the government which has already been formed in May.  In fact, it is a strong government controlling 81 out of the 87 seats in the Parliament.

The result of the Presidential election will NOT collapse the government. On the contrary, the Parliament can overthrow the veto decision of the President with two-third majority.
  
No danger of weak government

There is no danger of a weak government or an ineffective government.  Hence, Dr Tony Tan believes that with the right leadership, there's no need for Singaporeans to fear the future. 

Indeed, the government is too strong, for example, the recently case of Aljuned GRC, and it needs a caring President to heal the differences between the government and the people.   

We must have confidence on ourselves and our country.  Dr Tony Tan’s confidence for the future is different from us. His future is a pair of old spectacles. We need a future with new changes.   
  
The PAP government is running the country now and will continuing to do so until the next general election which will not only take place 5 years later.

There should be no fear and worry to vote for a candidate other than Dr Tony Tan.  Voting is compulsory and secret.  

Government can work with whoever is elected

Speaking on the eve of Nomination Day, PM Lee stressed that it is important for Singapore to have a good President, and for the President to work closely with the government.

He added that his government will work with the man chosen by voters, whoever he is.

So, if you think Tan Jee Say is a good President, then you should vote for him.  The definition of good President is defined by you, the voters, not the government.  The government must respect the choice of the people and work closely with the President.

The Presidential Elections Committee, in assessing the suitability of each hopeful, was satisfied that Mr Tan Kin Lian, Dr Tony Tan, Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr Tan Jee Say are all men of integrity, good character and reputation.

All candidates have integrity, good character and reputation.  You have a choice not to veto for Dr Tony Tan.

What we do need now is a President different from the past. We need a President with a heart to voice out the concerns of the people.  He has to be different from the PAP government otherwise there will have group thinking from top to bottom.

King in the losing kingdom

The Aljunied incident is another case that people’s voice and choice are not respected by the government and if we continue to elect Dr Tony Tan as President, then the situation will not change, the PAP will continue to use their government machinery (HDB, PA, etc) to bully the people.  

Speaking to reporters before his Meet the People Session yesterday, a visibly worked-up Mr Low Thia Khiang said: "The way I look at it is ... it seems to me to be the case that some Residents' Committees behave like the king in their own kingdom ... They expect to be treated (with) priority."

He added: "Now they want to cut out - after they lost Aljunied GRC - part of the common property, to be their own kingdom ... (and) to impose conditions on people who want to use the premises."  (Today, 25 Aug)

The President as an independent mind and non-political person can remind the government to be neutral on this matter.

If allegations are false, Dr Tony Tan should sue

Throughout the campaign, there are several rumours regarding to Dr. Tony Tan’s family.  Even all his three sons issued statement to clarify the matter, the voters still have doubt.

Dr Tony Tan should sue whoever spreads the rumours and not just felt that ‘he was 'deeply disappointed' by these online allegations.  Disappointment will not kill the allegations.

Dr Tony Tan is close to the PAP and he is not Ong Teng Cheong.  In all his interviews, discussions and talks, he wants to continue to be a pro-PAP President. If you like it this way, then you vote for him.

Otherwise, look for a heart, or a high-5.   A divided Singapore urgently needs a caring President with a heart and voice out their concerns. 

Wednesday, 24 August 2011

欠你钱的人说话比你还大声,有这么一回事吗?不信,看看你的公积金,工人党的阿裕尼。

欠你钱的人说话比你还大声,有这么一回事吗?不信,看看你的公积金,工人党的阿裕尼。

到底谁是主人,谁是债主,怎么好像换了位置。借出钱的债主,债权人,好像没有发言权。而拿着你的钱的人,欠你钱的人,却四处炫耀,在世界各地投资,成为世界上最有影响力的投资者。

当淡马锡控股和政府投资公司在世界各地投资时,可否想到,这是公积金会员的血汗钱。

民选总统帮助欠钱的人,还是借出钱的人

民选总统到底要站在那一边,他是要帮助欠钱的人(政府),还是借出钱的新加坡人民。总统的职权之一,就是要为人民看好公积金,看好储备金。储备金如果没了,也就等于公积金也没了。但是,总统也可以不看储备的账簿,跟现任总统一样,不只不看,他还曾经让欠钱的人,动用多一些钱,而没有
向借出钱的人报告。

在四位候选人中,陈庆炎是唯一,也是最可能维持现状的人。那就是说,借出钱的人,政府的债主,公积金会员,还是要像过去12年来,看不到账簿。其他三位总统候选人,在不程度上,都会要求政府每年出一份年报,报告储备的状况。

歪理变成有理

这好像是一个歪理,但是,有时借出钱来的人,的确是有口难言,不上不下,不知如何是好。你看看中国,美国的最大债权国,虽然,钱是借出了,但是,又害怕收不回来,又害怕美国赖账,更加害怕美国倒了,血本无归。当美国开口再借时,又不能说不,只好再买美国的债券。几年后,收回美金,又不值钱。

新加坡人民是公积金的会员,把钱借给了政府,政府拿到国外去投资,投资的结果,没有人知道,总统也不理。公积金会员,虽然像中国一样,有怨言,但是,有苦说不出,当政府再发新加坡政府债券时,公积金局就代会员自动的去买。

所以说,美国说话比你中国大声,欠钱的人就是有这个歪理,夹持着你,让你看他的脸色。公积金会员也不是一样吗?你借钱给政府,政府没有感谢你,不让你看账簿,还要你继续买债券,你又不得不买,因为,你的钱锁在公积金局,不到老年拿不出来的。

你有权否决这个歪理

本星期六,当你站在投票箱前,如果认为欠你钱的人说话可以比你还大声的话,并且同意这个歪理的话,那你就投选陈庆炎,他会让你一直低下头做人,看不到储备的账簿。陈如斯则不同,他会公布储备金年报,他会要求自己以道德良心为做事的标准。

新加坡人应该要向这个歪理说。几十年来,欠钱的政府,没有说声谢谢,还说他在国外投资有理,给你看个总数,看个回报率。美国虽然没有给中国看本身的账簿,但是美国国内,三权鼎立,账簿的透明度肯定是有的,借钱还要辩论。我们的政府当然看不起这个做法,为何要这么麻烦,总统都不理了,国会也管不了,继续我行我素,继续跟公积金局拿钱。

霸道行为也反映在治国上

政府的这种霸道行为,也当然不局限在公积金,储备问题上,也延伸到治国方面。早报这条新闻真妙,好像前后倒置:

‘阿裕尼后港市镇理事会改变原有立场,不再规定基层组织在租用市镇会所管辖的场地时须邀请该区国会议员出席。人民协会也因此作出相应调整,不再禁止议员出席非基层组织在人协管辖场地所主办的活动。换言之,所有议员往后都能应邀出席类似中元会晚宴的活动,反对党议员也不例外。’

这像不像政府处理公积金的手法。建屋局把阿裕尼市镇会区内用于主办社区活动的26个公共场所拿回,再租借给人协。
然后,政府告诉你,这26个地方,你不用管理了。由人协来管。如果你工人党不出声,你的议员不可以参加这26地方的活动。现在,你投诉,我就让你出席。

这个歪理可真妙。我把你从家里赶走,让另一个人来管,如果你不出声,那是你的事。现在,既然你投诉了,连总统候选人也觉得不妥,我就好心,让你可以回家看看,出席活动。

欠钱最大,不会永远都这样下去的

行动党政府不能不正视这种借钱最大的心理,人民没有欠你什么,反而还借钱给你,你拿了钱去花,还对借钱的人不理不睬,喜欢就说可以来看看,不喜欢就说,储备金太机密,不可以随便透露。

时代已经改变了,欠钱最大的心理也要收起来了。如果,不改变,官逼民反,不是这次总统选举,就是下次大选,人民的力量会让你做出痛苦的改变。

Does Dr Tony Tan really have the economic and finance brain for the coming crisis?


When the West is looking for China and India for solutions for their economic and financial problems, does Tony Tan have any knowledge about these two countries?  All we know about is his unimpressive performance at the GIC.

We know Goh Chok Tong knows something about India and Lee Kuan Yew is recognised by the West to be a Chinese expert.  But there is no mention of Dr Tony Tan having any special knowledge on these two countries.  In the TOC’s Face to Face, he even could not remember a famous phrase of Mao and quickly pronounced he was not a …

For the past 30 years, Dr Tony Tan is associated with the economic success (as well as the setback) of Singapore. We are one of the most successful models for capitalism in the world, even the west is very envy of us.  Our latest attempt to boost our economy is still a continuation of western model and will result to even bigger gap between rich and poor.

The West now acknowledges the shortfall of their economic strategies and options of the past and is looking for new solutions, including inputs from the East and Latin America

New model for Singapore but can he contributes?

In his speech at SMU Dr Tony Tan recognised that Singapore has reached a level that we need to seek new model and route for our economy.  However, his western trained knowledge in finance and economic may not be suitable for future Singapore.  Instead, it could be an obstacle and provides wrong advices just like what he did in the GIC.

He said he was an experienced hand in the financial world and claimed that he would be the best candidate to handle an economic storm.

“With my background in these areas,” he touted, “and with the knowledge which I have of the financial market, and the global economy, I believe that I will be able to make the contribution to and help the government and the ministers…to understand the situation better because I worked in these fields for the last 20 years.”

His offer at the lunch rally is another western solution

He is going to speak at the lunch rally on economic situation and jobs.  Again, from the western perspective, I think and I believe.

Do we still need an outdated western model to solve today’s economic problems?

And even you want to go back to the fundamental, for Dr Tony Tan, his fundamental is his western education.  No wonder he only knows how to invest in the USA, however, even his US investments do not generate good income for Singapore reserve.

So when the wave is moving to the East, how can Dr Tony Tan help Singapore to benefit from the wind change?  If the government takes his advice and the reserve will 输得更惨 (loses even more money).

Dr Tony Tan’s strength in economic and finance after all is not a great deal and Singapore will not benefit for having him as President.  Furthermore, he is only professionally trained in physics and mathematics.

A western trained economist with the understanding of the East can give and provide better solutions to Singapore, not Dr Tony Tan if we really need one.

However, within Singapore, we need to look for a caring President. It is better for voters to put on a pair of glasses to look for a heart – a missing heart hiding some ways in the past 50 years. 

Tuesday, 23 August 2011

如果李光耀是总统,‘总统职权’会是个议题吗? 如果阿裕尼还是行动党的,租借事件会发生吗?




只许国官放火,不许当选议员点灯


总统选举在星期六举行,几个月以来,我们一直在讨论,‘总统职权’的课题,甚至出现什么灰色地带,可以有权,也可以无权,看你怎么变通,怎么诠释。这个说法有一定道理,因为,宪法和法律是死的,人是变通的,不同的人自然有不同的诠释。

因此如果我们假设李光耀当了总统,还会有人会提出‘总统职权’的议题吗?有人‘敢’提出这么一个问题吗?他要怎么诠释总统的职权,恐怕其他的人很难说三道四。即使是总理, 也要敬他三分。

不同的人不同的诠释权力

为何有这个偏差,为何不同的人,就会有不同的结果。你看一看王鼎昌,他是一个诠释的方法,你再看那丹,那又是一个另一个诠释方法,因此,不论谁是下一任总统,他的诠释方法,也将会不一样。陈庆炎可能接近那丹,而陈如斯则接近王鼎昌,因为,他要以王鼎昌作为榜样。

因此,在宪法这个不变的法律下,黑纸白字打印出来的条文下,不同的人,就会出现不同的诠释版本。还有,还要看这个人,如何变通,圆通的在宪法所赋予民选总统的权力范围内诠释他的权力。

那么,为何总统的职权课题,会跟阿裕尼的租借事件有关呢?

政府处理总统职权课题和阿裕尼租借事件,是同一个样本

开始时,律政部长不是高调说总统没有权力,要听政府的话,不是第二权力中心。不止要听政府的话,还不可以随便发言,甚至,还可以被国会否决。硬的不行后,部长才说,总统有些权力,因为,他负责保护国库储备。

最可怕的是,行动党政府最敢敢不顾民意,以它一路来的做法,继续我行我素。因此,行动党在处理阿裕尼租借事件的态度,不也和李光耀诠释总统职权一样,没有人敢问,没有人敢理,先斩后奏,不论选民喜欢与否,即使已经不再阿裕尼当选,依然可以任用国家资源,不让工人党有机会利用设施,搞亲民活动。

这似乎是瞎扯的远了点吧?但是,我们扪心自问,你真的会问敢问李光耀,为何你会如此诠释总统职权,你为何不照宪法公布的黑纸白字来做事吗?或者,责问他,你不可以这样诠释,总统不是第二权力中心。

霸道行为,不敢面对政治现实

现在,工人党把问题提出来,建屋局的回答事实而非。这样的霸道行为,是民主国家中少有的。或者说,行动党跟不上时代,根本不要面对政治的现实。

阿裕尼租借事件缘起于5月大选后,行动党政府把之前由阿裕尼市镇理事会管辖,用于主办社区活动的26个公共场所,从阿裕尼市镇会手中拿回,然后建屋发展局再租借给人民协会,不再由该区市镇会管理。

如果,阿裕尼市镇会依然是控制在行动党手中,建屋发展局会多此一举,做出转租的动作吗?行动党要这么诠释政府的权力,做出诠释租借的决定,你又能怎样?我就是要这么做,这样诠释,我是政府,我就是要这么做,选民不投行动党,但是,我是执政党,有权叫建屋局转租,建屋局就要转租。

呜呼!我们竟然会选出一个不尊重民意的政府,不尊重阿裕尼选民的投票权力,自我诠释法律的行动党政府。

阿裕尼选民已经以选票决定由工人党来管理市镇会,这已经是一项黑纸白字的决定,并且,以鲜明的数字来说明他们的意愿。这还不够明确吗?

总统候选人也对此有意见。除了陈如斯外,其他三位总统候选人都觉得这个决定需要检讨,找出原因。

无需授权,租借可以转移,储备也自然可以转移

事实上,建屋局在行动党落选阿裕尼后,就有计划的转移租借的地方。这从工人党主席林瑞莲发表的文告声明看出来,阿裕尼后港市镇会是在今年621日接到建屋局的电邮,列明那些不在阿裕尼-后港市镇会管辖的地点,其中有26个原本是属于之前的阿裕尼市镇会管理。市镇会事后几次向建屋局查询,对方在713日才答复说,这些地点分别在五月底与六月中租借给人协,但未解释原因。

当阿裕尼选民在投选工人党时,为何没有获得预先通知,这项转移租借的事情,这不是一项欺骗行为吗?说的严重些,就好像,政府把储备的钱,移来移去,没有跟总统报告,当然,也不会跟人民报告,最后,钱不知移到那里去。

或许,还有好多移来移去的事情还没爆光,好戏还在后头。因此,投选陈如斯,就可以更早的看到好戏。

It is easier to transfer money assets in the Reserve than the physical leases in Aljunied



In this Presidential Election, we are selecting a candidate to safe guard our reserve.  However, our reserves are all in numbers, for example investments in shares, stocks and gold etc.  Our CPF money is also the same, in numbers of units of Singapore Government Securities.  To transfer these money assets is very easy; you just need to key in the password and the correct codes.

We don’t know the magic numbers in our reserve.  We certainly don’t know how they transfer the money assets.  But if it is in the case like the one happened in Aljunied, then we will have to worry about it and ask for greater transparency.

Transfer of lease from HDB to PA

The Housing and Development Board's (HDB) "unilateral decision" to lease 26 sites to the People's Association (PA) and exclude them from common property managed by the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council "is politically motivated and an abuse of power", the Workers' Party (WP) charged yesterday. (Today 23 Aug)

In a media statement yesterday, WP chairman Sylvia Lim argued that HDB - "as part of the Government machinery" - is abusing its power as land owner of common property in HDB estates to help the PA achieve the political objectives.

These include preventing elected MPs from holding activities at the excluded sites which are strategically located and convenient to residents; and curtailing the ground presence of the elected MPs, by warning the residents that their applications for events at those sites may not be approved in subsequent years if WP MPs were invited, she added. (Today 23 Aug)

The transfer of lease ONLY takes effective after WP won Aljunied GRC. If PAP remains in Aljunied, will HDB do the transfer?   

Against the wishes of the People

This is against the wishes of the Aljunied voters. It is a step back ward in our democratic system. Do you believe the PAP government is listening to the people?

If a non-PAP endorsed candidate wins the Presidency, can you imagine what kind of transfer will the government do to our reserve?  But if we don’t elect this candidate, we never know the true picture or half true picture.

Therefore, voting a candidate like Tan Jee Say, we will see how the government transfer the money assets in the reserve even Tan Jee Say may not be able to veto it under the Constitution. At least, we can see the movements and the transfer of money assets. Tan Jee Say will report to the people how the government transfer the reserve from one pocket to another pocket.   

2nd class President, MPs, and citizens

This is really beyond the issue of ‘Chen Show Mao barred from events in Paya Lebar’.  It clearly shows that elected MPs of the other side will not be treated equally.

This will apply to the Elected President of the other side.  He will be treated differently.  Voters who vote for Tan Jee Say will have to be prepared that he will be treated differently from the government.  But at least, the trade off is we will see some transparencies in our reserve. 

If you vote for Tony Tan, you can never expect him to give you the transparency.  He is happy to remain the status quo. 

There is a price to pay for voting Tan Jee Say. But if you want transparency, you will have to vote for Tan Jee Say.

If the government treats some MPs and even the President as second class, do you think the government will treat the citizens as first class?

Now it is time for change. We want to be the first class citizens in this first world country called Singapore. 

Monday, 22 August 2011

李总理在为谁的信心喊话? 他自己还是陈庆炎?



对于新加坡这个外向型经济来说,世界经济局势的不利条件,将会在未来几年给新加坡带来严峻的挑战。不论在治国,民生,贫富,发展等各方面,的确需要国人同心,面对未来的挑战。

行动党在5月大选后已经执政了,因此,它希望能够有一个好像陈庆炎这样的总统来配合,一旦,需要动用储备,总统能够同意政府动用储备金的建议,同意拿出储备来应付挑战。

因此,早报出现这样的标题《总理:避免抗争性政治抬头 搞好政治经济才能持续繁盛》,也不是件值得见怪的事。问题是什么是整个政治体制陷入瘫痪状态?什么叫做健全的政治风气和体系? 何谓领导人必须要有解决基本问题的政治勇气?

用眼镜来找信心,还是用爱心,双手来找信心

看起来,他好像没有信心陈庆炎能够当选,还是,他没有信心可以和一位陈庆炎以外的候选人合作,更还是,我们的未来是个梦,就好像好多美国人一样,认为美国梦已经过去了,因此,信心也没有了。但是信心没有了,更加要有爱心,更要用双手来扶持人民。

难道,另一位候选人当选,整个政治体制就会陷入瘫痪状态吗?我国目前的政治风气和体系就会遭到破坏吗?而总理和政府,面对基本问题应该解决的时候,就拿不出政治勇气来了吗?选民应该能够分清楚这个差别吧?而政府更应该面对跟不同意见的人合作的挑战。

总理不是说,会尊重选民的意愿吗?可以跟任何一位候选人合作,为新加坡人民造福吗?怎么几天下来,就出现信心问题?为何总理没有想到,跟陈庆炎以外的总统合作,可能会更加好,既然这个候选人是选民选出,他将更能反映民情,协助政府和人民沟通,同时,以人民的意愿来决定储备金的适当用法。

有默契的未来梦

行动党在5月大选时,竞选口号是《同舟共济,共创未来》。因此,在几个月前,行动党已经在做着未来的梦。结果是,有大约40%的不愿意和行动党同舟共济,因为,不知道未来是个怎么样的梦。因此,行动党政府做出一些改变,希望大家对它要有信心。

所以,陈庆炎竞选总统的口号,做了一些改变,成了《充满信心, 迎接未来》,陈庆炎强调在面对国际社会动荡不安的当下,我国需要一个能让国人对未来充满希望的总统。我们要有信心,面对未来。

两个口号,都是说未来:一个是共创未来,一个是迎接未来。共创未来遇到40%的阻力,迎接未来不知又会遇到多少阻力。看样子,肯定比40%来得多。难怪,李总理,要为自己的信心喊话,也要为陈庆炎的信心喊话,两人一起喊,胆子会比较大,这样才会有信心。

50年的同舟共济和充满信心,那里去了

由此看来,他们一早就有默契,大家都在担心未来。因此,一个要求国人,要同舟共济,另一个要求国人,要充满信心。但是,世界就是这样,共患难的人很少,要求分享财富的人很多。同舟共济和充满信心谈何容易?过去50年来,不是一直都是同舟共济和充满信心吗? 每年的国庆,不也是在鼓吹着同舟共济和充满信心吗?

是不是这个口号出现报酬递减定律了?50年来,越听同舟共济和充满信心,就越不愿意同舟共济和越没有信心。

是应该改变了,选民想听一听是否还有同舟共济和充满信心以外的声音。现在,有4位候选人,说不定有一,两位的做法,看法,和陈庆炎不一样,对未来的看法不一样,选民觉得比较亲切,就选这个人来看好国库储备金。

外化而内不化,为民服务之心最重要

不论谁当选总统,只要总理心里面有着一颗爱民之心,外部的变化,是不能改变你的心的。即使是陈庆炎,你也不可能要求他样样事情跟你有着相同的看法,这种外部的调整,只是小和大的变化而已,如果,坚持只能和陈庆炎配合,这样很可能做不到外化,不能随外部改变,而做出相应改变。更为甚者,还伤到内部,内心。这么一来,又怎么有信心,面对未来的挑战呢!

唯有做到人民为先,坚持公平分配,缩短贫富差距,从内心出发,发出爱心,才是最重要的治国政策。心中只有国库储备,整天想着怎么用,怎么投资,那真是人民的不幸,即使是陈庆炎当总统,也共创不了未来。