Skip to main content

Clearer picture better dream when distance from the establishment


Far away from the establishment, looking back from a distance, the past PAP Mandarins are giving us a clearer picture and better future of Singapore.  From shock therapy of wage reform, insurance coverage, minimum wage, wealth creators to OB markers, Singaporeans now see more of the true views and opinions of the former associates of the government.

And most of them can only do it when they are retiring or leaving their previous government posts.  Perhaps, this is because when they integrate more with the ordinary people, the normality of their true characters re-appears.   By this analysis, when the government announces civil servants can join the National Conversation, one will be able to predict the outcome.  Even without gag order, the experience of the former top civil servants has already given you the answers.

What does it mean? It means when the government policies are not in the right directions, no one can stop it. When the government is doing some wrong things, no one can stop it from the public administration, all the way up to the Parliament and the President.    

What do you think? We wait to see some lights only after some former Mandarins recollect their experience when they are no more in their official positions. Even that we only see limited pictures or some selected versions and views like the OB markers comments from Cheong Yip Seng.   

So, are we really stepping ahead by a few steps or stay putting? Or, worst, we are like the Mandarins and civil servants waiting for further instructions from the PAP?        


Here are some quotes from some of them:

Gerard Ee after leaving NKF on Singapore dream:

I think nobody has really looked at it from a non-economic point of view. If you look at America, it is a diverse group of people, and they are proud to be Americans, especially in a crisis. They do not sing Star Spangled Banner; the common theme uniting them is America the Beautiful, because the song is about a dream.
Compare it to Stand Up For Singapore and Count On Me Singapore; it is as if we have not done enough. What holds people together is a common dream. Where is that song that paints the dream that we can share?http://www.todayonline.com/CommentaryandAnalysis/Commentary/EDC121019-0000029/In-search-of-the-Singapore-dream


Lim Chong Yah on income of the poor after leaving NWC:

He was the economist who created a stir when he suggested raising the pay of low income earners by 50 per cent over three years. But Prof Lim Chong Yah, 80, believes that it was the right thing to do and that the wage "shock therapy" suggestion had generated a lot of healthy discussion that moved the inequality debate forward.http://www.singapolitics.sg/gallery/lim-chong-yah-interview-part-1 

Ngiam Tong Tow on one-party state after retiring from civil service:

During the dialogue, Mr Ngiam was also asked about his thoughts on a one-party system versus a multi-party system. 
In response, Mr Ngiam cited the ancient cities of Sparta and Athens. "Sparta was efficient and disciplined, but in the end, it failed, because such a state is very brutal, whereas Athens was very chaotic, argumentative, messy, but they survived," he said.http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120830-0000067/Spread-young-talent-among-schools


Even Tommy Koh, he also talked about income gap, minimum wage and medical insurance:

He identified insurance as one area where Singapore “didn’t get it right”, touching also on the nation-state’s failure to achieve inclusive growth — more specifically in terms of plugging the income gap.
“We need to fix the equity of our existing healthcare system. We have a system at the moment that does not meet my standard of fairness,” he said. 
“I think the state should intervene and require all insurance companies to insure people with prior medical conditions. There should be no one in Singapore who is not insured against a potential catastrophic disease,” he added, noting that, currently, insurance companies will not cover applicants who have pre-existing medical conditions.http://sg.news.yahoo.com/insurance-should-cover-everyone--ambassador-tommy-koh.html 

Finally, even the mouthpiece of the PAP government has to acknowledge that changes are coming: no more newspapers closure, ISA, and more political space. Here are some points from Cheong Yip Seng and his book of OB Markers:

"I have seen newspapers closed when they fell foul of the government, and friends lose their jobs. Journalists have been detained. I did not suffer their fate, but many were the times when I was at the receiving end of Lee Kuan Yew's fury," he writes. 
But at the book launch on Friday, Mr Cheong - who is currently a Non-Resident Ambassador to Chile and a newspaper consultant - declared that such days were over. 
Saying he does not "see this Government resorting to the Internal Security Act to act against journalists", Mr Cheong said he felt the Government will become "less heavy-handed" over time, and will no longer close down a newspaper. 
He noted even its "favourite instrument" of changing editorial leadership in newsrooms will be less effective over time. 
A change in the newspaper team, every so often, "to operate in a way that on the one hand makes the Government happy and on the other, protects the credibility and integrity of the newspaper" is impossible, Mr Cheong said, "unless there are so many able journalists out there who could be shipped in and out".
Noting that it is impossible to restrict the flow of information in a modern economy, Mr Cheong said that as Singapore develops, "it is inevitable that the public is going to demand more political space".
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1232391/1/.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...