Let's get 100,000 signatures for Tan Kin Lian

New Site: Civic Advocator

2009-02-18T17:08:00.003+08:00

Civic Advocator is now live www.civicadvocator.net.

We will no longer update this site.

We will register a name for it after the poll closes.

Please let us know if you encounter any bugs/issues.

Thank you.

Volunteers for TKL

We are revamping our website. We hope to have your suggestion for a name for it.

2009-02-16T23:05:00.001+08:00

Some of us got together to work on improving this website.

Here is the preview of the website. Click on it to see the enlarged image, and some of the things that we are thinking of putting up there.

We are thinking of calling the website Civic Advocator. The aim of version 2.0 of this website is proposed as To observe, analyse, present our position, and call for action.

One of our first actions is to continue with our petition to ask Tan Kin Lian to stand for public election, as either President or Member of Parliament for Singapore.

We are also thinking of registering a name for this website.

We have considered some names for this website. Would you like to take a poll? We will name our website based on the most popular choice.

If you have suggestions to improve it, please let us know.

Do consider taking the poll to help us decide on the name of the site. We will let the poll run for about two weeks. ~~If we don't hear from you, we will assume that you are not interested in participating in this type of project.~~ We hope to make this website yours, so help us decide the name.

Results of the poll so far:

If you like to contribute to this website (as a writer, web designer, etc), or to help our volunteer work in general, do contact us.

Thank you.

Volunteers for TKL

[Wayang Party] Polls update: Over 97% want a Commission of Inquiry to probe reserves loss

2009-02-16T22:03:00.004+08:00

http://wayangparty.com/?p=5268

The poll is here:
http://wayangparty.wordpress.com/2009/02/13/polls-on-the-temasek-debacle/

"Strike while the iron is hot'? - Re: Update on the Petition for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for Public Office

2009-02-16T22:03:00.002+08:00

Someone wrote to us with a suggestion. We publish it here.

-----------------------

Yes, I'd be prepared to offer my services if needed - for the sake of Singapore and Singaporeans.

Jeffrey

----------------------

Dear Jeffrey
It is a good idea, and we hope Mr Tan could consider doing this.

If he goes for it, would you be able to volunteer to help in whatever ways you could to support him for the talks at Speakers' Corner please?

Thank you.

Volunteers for TKL

-------
Given the possibility of Mr Tan standing for Public Office (I personally will prefer he stand for the EP although I will fully support him if he decides to contest the GE2011 instead), may I suggest that he "strike while the iron is hot" - by organising a session (or sessions) at the Speakers' Corner to talk on the reserves, losses at Temasek and GIC and the role of the Presidency - for the sake of Singapore and Singaporeans.

Maybe he can do a "If I were the President of Singapore, I'd ....." thingy to let the citizens know what he'd do if elected..?

Even if he eventually decides not to run for the EP, at least such to-do's may set some benchmark on what are expected of the current President and any Presidential hopeful.

Just a thought for your consideration. Thanks

Rgds
Jeffrey

Singapore government should be more accountable to the people

2009-02-16T22:03:00.001+08:00

http://wayangparty.com/?p=5131

Excerpts:

In Singapore, there is no opposition in Parliament to take the regime to task for the mismanagement of our economy and reserves. Draconian laws curbing civil rights of citizens are in place to prevent Singaporeans from marching in the streets to protest. The state media tries to concoct a fairy tale to exonerate the regime from its gross negligence and lapse of judgement which is becoming increasingly difficult and embarrassing for them to cover up.

I sincerely call on worthy members of the PAP and the opposition who truly feel for the suffering and hardship of ordinary Singaporeans to set aside their partisan differences to form a Parliamentary Select Committee to probe the loss.

Sign petition for President Nathan to request for full disclosure of Temasek and GIC's accounts

2009-02-16T22:01:00.000+08:00

A petition by Wayang Party.

http://www.petitiononline.com/loss2009/petition.html

Ms Lim Hwee Hua should tell us what she meant if she said Singapore GIC losts 41%

2009-02-16T22:00:00.001+08:00

http://www.choongyong.com/2009/02/12/watch-it-live/

Excerpts:

Mrs Lim Hwee Hua was stumped for words for a few seconds, stammered a little, mumbled something about “it was reported during the budget debate last week”, while frantically flipping her file infront of her to look for an answer. Sylvia Lim spread her hands in a gesture asking “what number”, and Lim Hwee Hua, after not being able to give a specific number, suddenly succumbed and threw out a number, “41%”. The Speaker was nice to Lim Hwee Hua, seeing that she was not very sure of the number herself, and asked if she wants to clarify the number later. She took the opportunity, and since it was also time for the recess at 1520hrs, the Speaker declared that the Parliament go into recess.

A summary of my critique of the CPF Life scheme

2009-02-16T21:58:00.001+08:00

http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=2237

Excerpts:

In my view, the CPF Life scheme is highly deficient in that:

-the payouts are not indexed to inflation,
-the Government has not expressed any desire to co-fund the scheme, and
-the payout amount is subject to drastic change in the event that interest rates fall or life expectancies improve significantly.

The compulsory nature of the CPF Life scheme, or more generally, the compulsory nature of the Minimum Sum scheme itself transfers both control and responsibility of a person for his assets to the Government. This places a great moral responsibility on the Government to manage those assets in a transparent and accountable manner, and deliver returns that are on par with or even better than the best that the private sector can provide.

In particular, if both the Minimum Sum and CPF Life schemes are to be compulsory, the onus must be on the Government to play its part in ensuring that payouts remain relatively stable no matter how interest rates or mortality rates may change. This has not been done, and this deficiency form the crux of my critique of the scheme as it is currently presented.

A comment by Tan Kin Lian on an The Online Citizen article on nursing home

2009-02-15T22:48:00.004+08:00

Someone highlighted Tan Kin Lian's comment on a recent The Online Citizen article on foreign nursing home.

59) Tan Kin Lian on February 15th, 2009 12.52 pm
I agree with Gerard Giam (#3).
I know of some people who find nursing homes in Singapore to be too expensive. It is also difficult to find a bed at an affordable cost.
If I am not wrong, the Government does provide some subsidy for people who need to be in a nursing home, but this may not be enough for people who still find it to be too expensive.
If the subsidy can be used for a nursing home in Johore Bahru, where the cost is much lower, than it may meet the needs of people who are not well off. As Gerard said, this is just an option. The Government is [not] forcing people to put their parents there.
Johor Bahru is not too far away. It is just an additional half hour across the causeway. It is also a nice place to visit - not too expensive. The only problem is the perceived high crime rate, which I hope can be solved.
I do not know what else can be done to reduce the cost of nursing home in Singapore. Apart from land cost, we also have high labour cost. I think that the Government is reluctant to increase the subsidy for nursing home, so we should not rule out cheaper options such as Johor Bahru.
I think that Khaw Boon Wan meant well. It is quite unfair that he should be bashed for this suggestion. I agree with the complaints about the high cost of living in Singapore, but this is not KBW’s fault.

The full article and comments are here.

Happy Valentine Day

2009-02-14T11:51:00.002+08:00

We wish everybody a very happy Valentine Day.

Love prevails at all time!

Putting our old folks in Johor

2009-02-14T11:39:00.000+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/02/putting-our-old-folks-in-johor.html

Excerpts:

So this is life in Singapore, you spend your entire life working for money and when you're old the govt encourages your children to put you in a nursing home in Johor to save money.

366 detained without trial in last 5 years

2009-02-14T11:33:00.002+08:00

http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2009/yax-984.htm

Excerpts:

What is this beast called the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act? It's a very strange animal indeed, as you might have suspected from the fact that the word "temporary" is there in its name.

What the Singapore government must surely love is the catch-all Section 30, which allows the minister to detain any person "associated" with criminal activities. What is meant by "associated" is not defined.

The President may quash the order, amend the order, or prolong the detention.

Let me be blunt: It's a process fit only for banana republics.

No transparency. No accountability. Just secrecy. And HUGE losses.

2009-02-14T11:30:00.001+08:00

http://jg69.blogspot.com/2009/02/no-transparency-no-accountability-just.html

Excerpts:

Temasek says it oversees its portfolio prudently. But it has never provided historical financials to back up its claim of an 18% compounded annual "total shareholder return" by "market value," nor has it released detailed results showing how money flows among its subsidiaries, the holding company and its government shareholder. Temasek outlines its compensation arrangements but doesn't say how much it pays its top executives.

Temasek is 100% government-owned and isn't required to release publicly audited financial statements. The President of Singapore must sign off on the "appointment or removal" of the CEO and board members, according to Temasek's annual report. It cannot "draw on or diminish our past reserves without the President's concurrence." So even while it is a "commercially disciplined investment firm," as the company says, Temasek still answers to the Singapore executive. This system would be more effective if Singapore boasted a more vibrant democracy with better checks and balances.

Crisis spoils Singapore celebrations

2009-02-14T11:14:00.001+08:00

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e1c940fa-f8a5-11dd-aae8-000077b07658.html

Excerpts:

The economic downturn threatens to expose some of Singapore's vulnerabilities, including a wide gap between rich and poor and a heavy dependence on foreign investment for growth.

Terence Chong, of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, says: "Political order and economic stability may go hand in hand, but there is increasing awareness, even within the PAP, that that may no longer work."

He points to a feeling that the PAP is "out of touch with the general suffering".

Civic Activism at work

2009-02-12T09:41:00.009+08:00

We recently came across two groups of people pushing for change.

One is the Stomp out STOMP movement. They are asking Straits Time to stop certain nonsensical "citizen journalism".

We were subsequently told that the actual guys behind this are at http://stompoutstomp.blogspot.com/.

The other is calling for a petition for fairer transportation fares for polytechnic and tertiary students.

We applaud the civic activism of these guys.

Volunteers for TKL

Correspondence with [TKL friends on Facebook] continues... further

2009-02-11T18:15:00.004+08:00

Earlier, some volunteers corresponded with the owners of the Facebook group [Friends of Tan Kin Lian].

One of our readers decided to contribute his time to help these Friends. We hope [Friends] will take some time to consider.

----------------------------------------------
from Volunteers
to TKL Friends <tklfriends@gmail.com>
date Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 7:34 PM
subject Suggested Change in Profile Pic of Group of "Friends of Tan Kin Lian"

Hi TKLfriends,

I've visited the Group, thanks.

But if I may, I would like to suggest a change in your Group profile picture? I have a friend that supports mr tan and has been contributing his art work. This is what he suggests for your Group:

His rationale is that it is important to show that mr tan is with other people, and not like a solo hero. Here, he is shown with his friends, people that he has been helping. I wasn't too sure about the tagline "let us unite as one", sounds cheesy. Let me know if you want to remove that line, I will ask him to do it. I think "Friends" alone is fine and self-explanatory.

Yours

On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 9:32 PM, TKL Friends <tklfriends@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Friend:,

The volunteers have set up a Group of "Friends of Tan Kin Lian" on the facebook to support Mr Tan Kin Lian's bid for a public office, either as Elected President or Member of Parliament in Singapore.

It can serve as a grassroot support for his election, should he chooses to run for a public office in future.

Please link your facebook account to the Group of "Friends of Tan KinLian", and publicize its URL on your blog (if any):http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42687992231

Wish you a Happy Lunar New Year!
Regards,
TKLfriends
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42687992231

Madame Prime Minister bows out

2009-02-10T08:58:00.002+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/02/madame-prime-minister-bows-out/

Excerpts:

Madam Ho’s strategy was to gradually pry Temasek away from its languid roots in Singapore to position it as an active global investor.

But its fortunes have unravelled since then.

More crucially though, Temasek now finds itself highly exposed to ongoing turmoil amongst global financial institutions, having reportedly parked over 40% of its holdings in that sector. It was the result of foolhardily upping its stakes even as the situation worsened in the hope that the downturn would prove to be only an aberration.

It is of course easier to avoid such potholes with the benefit of hindsight.

In the same vein, though, one might similarly question whether Temasek’s gains since Madam Ho took charge were the product of bull runs in the markets rather than the result of exceptional ability on the part of management.

It’s impossible to tell whether Madam Ho was forced to leave after the bust in the financial sector proved to be one bad call too many.

Seen in a broader context, that might imply that the Lee family is gradually relinquishing the reins of Singapore Inc, perhaps to allow new blood in and to let it develop in a more unfettered fashion.

Notably though, the younger Mr Lee was subsequently installed as the chief of an aerospace regulator in Singapore. A similar job could yet be in store for Madam Ho –after all, the government has frequently reminded the public that the talent in its employ is too good to waste.

Proposal for the opposition, civil society and blogging community to get their act together

2009-02-10T08:55:00.001+08:00

http://wayangparty.com/?p=4966

Excerpts:

Who can be Singapore’s Anwar Ibrahim ? He need not necessarily be from the establishment. Is Mr Tan Kin Lian wiiling to be the messiah ? How about vocal NMPs like Siew Kum Hong and bloggers like Choo Zheng Xi ? Though this leader of national stature remains at large for the moment, he or she will eventually come out of the shadows when the time is right. As the Chinese saying goes “heros are created by extraordinary times” and Singapore is going into such times now if not already.

We are quietly hopeful for the future of Singapore politics. Totalitarian systems of government go against the grain of time and no family wealth will ever last three generations. It is a course of nature that all forms of dictatorships and tyranny will collapse on its own mighty weight eventually.

Even within the establishment, there are enlightened voices calling out for change and reform. The day of reckoning is not too far away. It may take another few elections or another decade; it may assume the form of a political tsunami or a quiet transition, but the winds of change which has so far eluded our beloved country will eventually arrive.

Trust, but verify

2009-02-10T08:52:00.001+08:00

http://geraldgiam.wordpress.com/2009/02/09/trust-but-verify/

Excerpts:

I am deeply shocked that the Minister would say that our government’s system is one that relies on trust.

How can you have trust without transparency? The two go hand in hand. Particularly so for financial and governance matters. Is the Minister expecting Singaporeans to trust a few handpicked men with hundreds of billions of dollars of our nation’s reserves?

Tan Kin Lian's speech at forum on "Challenges that alternative/opposition parties have to face" organised by the Singapore Democratic Party

2009-02-08T06:15:00.003+08:00

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqjz7c8_88c6r88qf9

Challenges facing the alternative/ opposition parties
Forum organised by Singapore Democratic Party

I wish to thank the organisers for inviting me to speak at this forum. I am not associated with any political party. so I accept this invitation as a civil society leader.

Thirty years ago, many people were proud to be Singaporeans. They identified with the country, elected leaders and the shared national goals. I belonged to that generation.

In recent years, there has been a widening gulf between government leaders and the people. This is reflected in the large number of protest votes at each general election and the increasing number of people migrating to other countries.

The alternative parties have benefited from the protest votes against the ruling party. However, this is not sufficient. They have not been able to attract the middle ground, i.e. people who wish to see a viable alternative to run Singapore.

Questions
These people ask the following questions:

a) Can we see a higher calibre of candidates in the alternative parties?
b) What do the alternative parties stand for?
c) Can they play an effective role in Parliament?
d) Can they form an alternative Government?

The alternative parties face a big challenge in responding to these questions. They are not able to draw on the support of the wider population. Many ordinary citizens do not wish to be associated with any alternative political party, as they are afraid of being discriminated in their job or business. Hence, the alternative parties are able to attract only a small handful of active members.

It is difficult for any political party to do much, if they do not have financial and people resources and if ordinary citizens are afraid of being involved.

Educate the people
Given this challenge, I suggest that the alternative parties should focus on an educational effort – to educate the Singaporeans about their roles, rights and responsibilities as citizens. This educational effort is more neutral, and does not require the participants to be aligned to any political party.

The political parties can do the following:

a) Educate the public about their the values and goals of their party
b) Show the public what alternative policies can do for Singapore and the people.
c) Communicate actively

Use of internet
One effective means of communication is through the internet, blogs and websites. It is a low cost and pervasive way to reach out and educate large numbers of people, i.e. their members, supporters and the general public. In turn, these people can help to spread the message, through word of mouth, to the other people who are not able to access the internet.

There is a fear among the political parties of being sued if their published articles are deemed to be defamatory. This fear has to be overcome. The party leaders can be careful, but not excessively cautious. You can adopt a positive approach. You do not need to give negative views about other people. You only need to give positive views about your alternative approach. You can be right, without showing somebody else to be wrong.

Even if you make a genuine mistake and your statements are alleged to be defamatory, you have the chance to retract and apologise. There is nothing to be ashamed of admitting a mistake. If you overcome this fear, you can use the internet website actively.

Find writers
How about finding the people to write? You do not need to rely on your party members only. You can invite civil society leaders to write and give their views. These writers do not need to be associated with your party. Your party can state its views in support of these writers.

You can encourage your active members to express their views in popular websites, such as The Online Citizen and other blogs. These active members should state that they belong to your party, but are expressing their views in their personal capacity. It will help your party to be better recognised.

Unite the alternative parties
There is a call for the alternative parties to be more united. The general public perceive the alternative parties to be more disunited, than united. This is true. In the past, there were more occasions for the alternative parties to disagree, than to agree.

I suggest the following approach to achieve unity. Each party should state its values, goals and views. This allows the other parties to identify and focus on the areas that they share in common, such as goals and ideology. In the absence of shared goals, it is the tendency for people to focus on their differences. Give them a chance to agree on the shared goals and work under a common platform.

Values
I suggest that alternative policies can be focused on certain values:
a) Honesty, accountability
b) Justice and fairness
c) Work for the good of the people
d) Positive and constructive

Summary
a) State your values and goals
b) Communicate actively
c) Focus on education
d) Invite people to write, and not require them to be associated with your party
e) Use the internet to communicate with your people and the wider public.

Tan Kin Lian

===========================

Arthur explains how the petition is organized

2009-02-07T08:00:00.009+08:00

Hello, my name is Arthur. I am one of the volunteers helping to organize this petition.

Arthur is, obviously, just a pseudonym and not my real name.

I maintain a blog somewhere on the internet and I lurk around in some of the local forums. In the real world, I am married, with kids, and holding a day job.

I have my reasons for volunteering my time to organize the petition. Some of them are captured here.

But I am not here to write about myself. What I want to do is to explain to people how our petition is organized.

The volunteers are trying to achieve a straightforward objective: to collect signatures for a petition. Whoever signs the petition supports the call for Tan Kin Lian to stand for election, either as the President or Member of Parliament of Singapore.

There are currently just over a thousand people who have signed the petition. This is very far from the target of 100,000 set by Tan Kin Lian.

For me, I do not really care about the result. We may never meet that target. But by signing the petition and participating in organizing the petition, I have satisfied my personal goals. That is good enough for me.

Sorry, I digressed. I am supposed to explain how this petition is organized.

Collection of Signatures

We are collecting signatures, either electronically or using the traditional hardcopy method.

Several people are helping to collect hardcopy signatures. I do not know who they are, and I do not want to know. The form is downloaded from here. Once signed, the hardcopy signatures are scanned and emailed to a gmail account. We do not print out any hardcopies. The scanned files are therefore stored somewhere on the internet by Google.

We also collect signatures electronically. So far, we had four sets of electronic signatures, which are all collected via the free internet service PetitionOnline.com. The data have since been saved as Google Docs, which are being stored some where online on the internet by Google. In fact, whatever data the volunteers collect, we encourage them to store online, using Google or other similar internet services.

The latest petition form is hosted by somebody. We ask for your name (anything you put we accept it) and email address (for us to contact you if you agree to let us contact you). The others, such as NRIC, contact numbers, are optional. The form is hosted for free, and there is no contractual relationship between that somebody and us. I do not know who is that entity. I do not ask, and I do not want to know. Someone told me that the form (and therefore the data?) is hosted in an oversea server. I did not verify that. But I trust that the people working there should know how to take care of themselves, if something happens.

Communication

The article you are reading on this blogsite is hosted on a blogger.com site, which is owned by Google. It is hosted overseas. Currently, only people who have signed the petition and who have expressed interest to write articles are invited in as authors. There are currently several such authors. Any one of them can write and amend another person’s article. This way, we will not know who amends which article, and we intend to keep it that way. This site allows up to 100 people to contribute. The door is wide open.

The volunteer group communicates with some of you through regular emails. Only those who signed the petition, and who specifically told us that they wish to get updates from us, receive the email after joining a Google Group. This way, we are not infringing any spamming offence. I do not know and have no intention to find out how Google Group stores the data (and I do not think they will ever tell anyone except maybe the US government).

We added a Twitter volunteer group about a week ago. Whatever that is published here goes out to our Twitter followers within 30 minutes. And they can retweet (ie broadcast) to their own followers. I last counted 490 followers. I believe some of the volunteers are in that crowd.

Privacy

I am explaining this to you so that you could understand the way we operate. The atmosphere of anxiety is real for some of us. Some of you could also be feeling the same, as you ponder whether if it is safe to even just sign the petition. I cannot say anything. You need to decide this for yourself.

What I can say is, I will jealously protect the privacy of the people that I deal with. This is why we try to keep all the data online, without any paper trace. Different people are doing different things around here. Sometime, different people can even get involved in the same thing. I do not know who could be doing what now. In fact, I do not know many things and I do not wish to know.

But I do know this. I admire people who openly show their support for our cause. Lee Chee Wai declares it. Kelly shouts on Twitter. Jas and her friend contribute logos and banners. RED-man argues his views. Sleepy Throat shares his idealism

I am a coward, so I choose to remain anonymous for as long as possible. I will play my part, by helping things out here and there, for now.

Call for Action

I have taken action by signing the petition and being one of the volunteers. If there is risk involved, then I am happy living with that risk. Sometime, it is better managing your own risk, rather than blindly entrusting someone else to manage the risks.

What about you? Are you not bothered by certain issues in Singapore? Have you been looking the other way, in order not to jeopardize your own career or vested interests? If you believe in our cause, sign our petition now. Never mind if you use a fictitious email account when you sign the petition. I do not think anyone would be bothered about verify anything here. I just hope the signature momentum could be built up, so that at some point in time I could tell Tan Kin Lian, “Ok, now you have no excuse since you have enough people on the ground telling you to go for the contest.”

If you have already signed, then consider helping us as a volunteer. Consider telling your friend, mother, father, sister, brother, wife, husband etc about us. Ask them to pay some attention on the things that we are saying; and try to understand what we are trying to achieve. No, it is not about job or making money or marriage or the environment or living will. This is about everything, about doing something for Singapore, a place where our children shall decide whether or not to stay on.

I am also calling people such as Lucky Tan, FeedMeToTheFish, Redbean, Gerald Giam, MrBrown, MrWang, and the many other folks talking on various blogsites and forums to take action. I have been reading what you guys are writing. If you think getting Tan Kin Lian to go for election could help you and your friends, please consider signing our petition.

If you cannot forgive Tan Kin Lian because of his past political affiliation or whatever else that he did in the past, look again at what he is doing now. Engage him. You might change your mind. Or tell me openly what is bugging you. Change my mind about what I believe.

Folks, do something. If I do not do anything, nothing will happen. Then in the end, I can only blame myself for sitting here and not doing anything. If not enough people take action, then the things that we hope can happen will never happen.

Yours sincerely,

Arthur
a Volunteer for TKL

An Artist Responds!

2009-02-06T19:53:00.005+08:00

We thank one of our readers for his contribution.

In his words: "The colours of the state flag and symbols within the initials TKL reflect the man's love and service for his country. Not many successful men and women have the dedication Mr Tan has shown to help his fellow country folk; most will probably choose to enjoy their retirement years in luxury and relaxation!"

We thank him for his efforts and kind gesture. Every contribution, no matter how small, matters. Not to us, but to Singapore.

Jas

China Charter 08

2009-02-06T18:26:00.000+08:00

Charter 08 (Chinese: 零八宪章; pinyin: Língbā Xiànzhāng) is a manifesto signed by over 303 Chinese intellectuals and human rights activists to promote political reform and democratization in the People's Republic of China. [Source]

We thought this could be a good template for a civic manifesto.

Here is the full translation in English and some interesting articles:

- Far Eastern Economic Review article (Feb 2009)
- How Charter 08 is being received in China

Volunteers for TKL

The Online CItizen Editorial: RADM Lui’s comments highlight growing divide that needs to be bridged

2009-02-06T17:57:00.000+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/02/editorial-radm-lui’s-comments-highlight-growing-divide-that-needs-to-be-bridged/

Excerpts:

No political fault should ever warrant physical violence in a respectable democracy, and comments claiming Mr Seng got his just deserts do not belong in civilized political discourse.

If insensitivity is the symptom, the root illness is the abuse of hegemony. Politically aware Singaporeans are all too familiar with the structural advantages the PAP has used to protect itself: the Group Representative Constituency scheme, laws on public assembly and expression, indirect control of the press, the redrawing of electoral boundaries, the suing of opposition figures.

Unless greater progress is made unraveling these obstacles that stunt public expression at the ballot box and the soapbox, the spillover on the freest platform in Singapore will continue to be rancorous.

The independence of an Indepedent Presidency

2009-02-06T17:04:00.000+08:00

http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/2009/02/independence-of-indepedent-presidency.html

Excerpts:

We are fortunate that the President has not been called upon to exercise his powers on controversial issues. If there be a day, the President's independence will not just be discussed in Parliament only. It is obvious that for the President to work independently, he needs to be independent or not too closely linked with the govt. And this applies to the Presidential Council as well. We are all familiar with the chorus, 'All the King's men.'

About faceless online critics

2009-02-06T17:01:00.000+08:00

http://feedmetothefish.blogspot.com/2009/01/eugene-wee-we-love-you.html

Excerpts:

If not for bloggers (anonymous or otherwise) and internet and youtube, I would not have known of the following:

1. Exchanges between Chee Soon Juan and Lee Kuan Yew and his son in court and the transcripts that tell it like it is!
2. Singapore Rebel - the video by Martyn See on Chee Soon Juan.
3. Hear Said Zahari speaking in Mandarin and calling Lee Kuan Yew a "face saving", "coward" and "such a vindictive person"
4. Hear Tan Wah Peow speaks of his loss of freedom in Singapore.
5. The crazy riot police going after 4 silent demonstrators who asked for transparency in CPF, NKF & HDB.
6. Singapore's Gentle Revolutionery Chia Thye Poh who was locked up for 32 years without trial for not saying what was demanded of him.
7. The Story of the AG before he becomes the CJ

Will the artists amongst our supporters step up and help?

2009-02-05T22:04:00.004+08:00

We came across the following presentation on Guerrilla Art.

Catalyst Guerrilla Art

View more presentations from Andy Berndt. (tags: advocacy tobacco)

We know. Our website sucks.

Will the artistic people amongst us step up to help inject energy here?

Contact us.

Volunteers for TKL

Singapore Govt says: Internet very unruly and unkind, not self-regulated enough

2009-02-05T22:00:00.001+08:00

http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2009/02/if-you-never-say-things-we-want-you-to-say-you-are-not-responsible-netizen.html

Excerpts:

Coffee shop uncles and netizens should all take a leaf from our responsible and balanced press and assorted local mainstream media. That is where true self-regulation and nation-building takes place.

Relief loans to replace loss of earnings

2009-02-05T20:31:00.000+08:00

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqjz7c8_86cc7wbfgn

Excerpts:

The recent methods to stimulate the economy are:
a) Spend on infrastructure works (i.e. Singapore and China approach)
b) Give money to the people to spend (i.e the US stimulus package)

These methods are good. I wish to suggest a third method:
c) Allow each person to apply for a relief loan for the loss or reduction of earnings

Tan Kin Lian to speak at forum on the topic "Challenges that alternative/opposition parties have to face"

2009-02-05T07:00:00.000+08:00

We announced earlier on the above talk.

RSVP here.

More details below:

http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2009/01/forum-sat-7-feb-2009-afternoon.html

Posted by Tan Kin Lian | 25 January 2009

I have agreed to speak at the following forum on the topic "Challenges that alternative/opposition parties have to face".

Date: 7 Feb 2009, Saturday
Time: 2-5 pm
Place: Copthorne Orchid Hotel, Dunearn Road, Radius Room

I hope that the regular visitors of my blog will attend this forum.

********************
http://chiatilik.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/opposition-where-to-forum-organised-by-the-singapore-democratic-party-on-7th-february-2009-at-copthorne-orchid-hotel/

Written by Chia Ti Lik

Opposition - Where To?
Monday, 26 January 2009
Singapore Democrats

In an age of democratic change, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong continues to insist that a one-party system is good for Singapore. This is regardless of what the opposition and Singaporeans at large think and want.
But even as we debate on whether such a one-party state is desirable for this country, what are opposition parties doing to build confidence among the electorate for support? Is greater Opposition unity and cooperation a necessary, or even important, factor in attracting votes? Or is the authoritarian system making elections in Singapore a non-starter?

Also does civil society and the blogging community have a role to play in helping to develop a multi-party system? Given the state of politics here, is it desirable for the political opposition and civil society to work closer together to promote democracy? If so, in what ways?

These are important questions that will be tackled at a public forum organised by the Singapore Democrats entitled Opposition - Where To?:

Date: 7 Feb 09, Saturday
Time: 2-6 pm
Venue: Aerides Room, Copthorne Orchid Hotel, 214 Dunearn Road
Admission: Free

We are honoured to have the following party and civil society leaders as panel speakers:

1. Desmond Lim, Secretary-General, Singapore Democratic Alliance
2. Ng Teck Siong, Chairman, Reform Party
3. Sin Kek Tong, Chariman, Singapore People’s Party
4. Sebastian Teo, President, National Solidarity Party
5. Gandhi Ambalam, Chairman, Singapore Democratic Party
Representing civil society are:
1. Chia Ti Lik, blogger and activist
2. Mohd Jufrie, activist and former election candidate
3. Ng E-jay, blogger and activist
4. Tan Kin Lian, blogger and financial activist
5. Seelan Palay, blogger and activist

Was asked to speak at this event. I have agreed to do so, hopefully i won’t disappoint and hopefully i won’t break the rostrum in anger.

The TRUTH about Jobs Credit!

2009-02-04T18:07:00.000+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/02/truth-about-jobs-credit.html

Excerpt:

Here is the truth about the jobs credit. I first heard about this term called the jobs credit during Barak Obama's campaign a few months ago. He wanted to subsidise firms for keeping and hiring workers. This idea was thrown out by his own party members, the Democrats, as unworkable.

List of Twitters who said "I signed the petition"

2009-02-04T10:22:00.006+08:00

@qutequte
@litford
@lincoln_gu

Why Taipei’s MRT trumps Singapore’s

2009-02-03T21:50:00.001+08:00

http://www.theedgesingapore.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1254%3Awhy-taipeis-mrt-trumps-singapores&catid=979%3Asunita-sue-leng&Itemid=54

Excerpts:

And the broad conclusion is that Taipei proves it is possible to offer a high-quality, high-frequency and affordable MRT service without losing money. It also suggests that certain services, such as public transport, tend to function optimally as natural monopolies and ought not to be owned by companies that seek to maximise profits.

More accountability and transparency needed in management of Singapore’s Sovereign Wealth Funds

2009-02-03T21:47:00.000+08:00

http://wayangparty.com/?p=4765

Excerpts:

Nobody has any idea as Singapore’s SWFs are not required by law to reveal their income and expenditure. As Singapore has no natural resources like the Norwegien Pension Fund which managed revenues from Norway’s oil and gas production, the funds of these SWFs are probably accumulated via a combination of budget surpluses from previous years, CPF contributions of Singaporeans and earnings accrued through the sale of land and public housing.

Regardless of where the funds come from, they belong to every Singaporean who have stakes in it. Every company listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange are required to publish an annual report to be sent to every shareholder. Yet few Singaporeans are aware of how these SWFs are being managed.

Singapore’s economy: Has the Government been caught with its pants down?

2009-02-03T21:11:00.001+08:00

http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=2109#more-2109

Excerpts:

The Government has truly been caught with its pants down, both in its inadequate response to deteriorating global economic conditions, as well as its failure to put Singapore’s economy on a sound footing in what has proven to be a very volatile start to the 21st Century.

The wages of deceit

2009-02-03T21:07:00.002+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/02/the-wages-of-deceit/

Excerpts:

That the authorities are often keen to get quick resolutions to disputes means that workers are particularly vulnerable to being short-changed by employers who find it all too to get away with their misdeeds.

SM Goh : Reserves not for social assistance

2009-02-03T21:04:00.002+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/02/sm-goh-reserves-not-for-social.html

Excerpts:

In Singapore we don't have oil, every reserve dollar came from the work that you and I did, our parents did yet the PAP does not want to use it for the welfare of the people.

New online petition signature form

2009-02-03T11:16:00.003+08:00

We have finished testing the new online form for people to sign our petition.

The new form is now live.

Please let us know if you come across any bugs.

Thank you.

Volunteers for TKL

Thanks, @qutequte for your support

2009-02-03T07:25:00.009+08:00

We are now on Twitter (and Twitwall)

2009-01-30T12:04:00.004+08:00

We are now on Twitter.

You could follow us here.

We are also on Twitwall. The site is here.

Volunteers for TKL

Questions and Suggestions from People

2009-01-29T16:20:00.004+08:00

Update from Tell Singapore Government:

Top 3 Suggestions:

Top 3 Questions:

My Dear Government, Why Do You Treat Me So?

2009-01-28T16:26:00.003+08:00

http://gangasudhan.com/blog/2009/01/my-dear-government-why-do-you-treat-me.html

Written by Ganga Sudhan | 25 January 2009

As a (second class) Singaporean, I am deeply saddened today to discover that my government is trying to enact changes to the law that will effectively give itself (too much) power in controlling the freedom of normal Singaporeans in using their camera-phones or video cameras to capture protests, acts of activism and such on film.

My friend alerted me to this by exclaiming that
"Will recording or filming of events which are considered illegal in law now itself be considered illegal?"
and I responded by saying
"I think the issue is with the 'live' streaming of films and not video recording per se. It would not be feasible to ban the recording of illegal events altogether because this would effect media reporting as well..."
He then replied with further information saying
"...it seemed to say that this amendment was going to give powers for police to confiscate the cameras or stop the filming of protests by people who were not journalists by profession."

I thought to myself, this was quite alarming and distatseful if it were to be the case - but I still did not believe it could be true. So I went searching for the original documentation on these changes and relied on the Singapore Statutes Online and the Films (Amendment) Bill as posted on the Singapore Parliament website.

Of the 3 changes that have been proposed in the bill (a local copy on my server, just in case), 2 are merely cosmetic changes (IMHO) which allow for an advisory board to influence decisions (section 4) and paraphrasing the section to allow for more comprehensiveness (Section 26).

The (shocking) point of contention, however, for me is the 3rd proposed change which refers to the definition and interpretation as per the provisions under the Films Act (Chapter 107), Section 2:
2-(2) For the purposes of this Act, a film is directed towards a political end in Singapore if the film —

(a) contains wholly or partly any matter which is intended or likely to affect voting in any election or national referendum in Singapore;

(b) contains wholly or partly either partisan or biased references to or comments on any political matter, including but not limited to any of the following:
(i) an election or a national referendum in Singapore;
(ii) a candidate or group of candidates in an election;
(iii) an issue submitted or otherwise before electors in an election or a national referendum in Singapore;
(iv) the Government or a previous Government or the opposition to the Government or previous Government;
(v) a Member of Parliament;
(vi) a current policy of the Government or an issue of public controversy in Singapore; or
(vii) a political party in Singapore or any body whose objects relate wholly or mainly to politics in Singapore, or any branch of such party or body.
2-(3) For the avoidance of doubt, any film which is made solely for the purpose of

(a) reporting of current events; or

(b) informing or educating persons on the procedures and polling times for any election or national referendum in Singapore,

is not a party political film.
After (and not if) the changes have been implemented, this section will read as follows (changes in red):
2-(2) For the purposes of this Act, a film is directed towards a political end in Singapore if the film —

(a) contains wholly or partly any matter which, in the opinion of the Board, is intended or likely to affect voting in any election or national referendum in Singapore;

(b) contains wholly or partly references to or comments on any political matter which, in the opinion of the Board, are either partisan or biased; and any "political matter" includes but is not limited to any of the following:
(i) an election or a national referendum in Singapore;
(ii) a candidate or group of candidates in an election;
(iii) an issue submitted or otherwise before electors in an election or a national referendum in Singapore;
(iv) the Government or a previous Government or the opposition to the Government or previous Government;
(v) a Member of Parliament;
(vi) a current policy of the Government or an issue of public controversy in Singapore; or
(vii) a political party in Singapore or any body whose objects relate wholly or mainly to politics in Singapore, or any branch of such party or body.

The most critical change of all is Section 2-3(a) which changes from 'reporting of current events' to '...reporting of news by a broadcasting service licenced under any written law'. This in itself places anyone filming an 'illegal event' who does not have a press pass in the cross hairs of the authorities (which include the Police) who, under Section 34 of this act, can search and seize any film and equipment used.

Subsequently (upon conviction) such equipment and film 'shall be forfeited and shall be destroyed or otherwise disposed of in such manner as the Minister may direct' as well.

I am deeply saddened that in the proposed Bill, where explanations and justifications were provided for all the changes, this critical change was explained away as the expansion of the original list without referring to the change in terminology - ayone can report on current affairs but only a select few may be part of 'a broadcasting service licenced by any law'.

It seems as though this telling change is being sneaked in without any forthright explanation. Honestly, I cannot accept the change or the manner in which it has been included. As far as I am concerned, it is truly a sad day for Singapore as a modern city when (and not if) this section comes into play.

Then, not only will protesting be illegal, so will filming it. My God! What's next? Turning your head to glance becomes an offence? Or will reading the placard/banner/t-shirt lead to being indefinitely detained under the ISA?

Life in Singapore

2009-01-28T16:05:00.005+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/01/life-in-singapore/

Written by Tan Kin Lian | 22 January 2009

Excerpts:

I am worried about the following findings from this survey:

- Unhappiness about the tax, GST, charges and high cost of living
- Low rating for Government leaders
- Significant dissatisfaction rating of the lower income groups
- Hard work and inadequate wages of the younger people.
- Unhappiness about National Service
- Unhappiness about the influx of foreign workers

The positive ratings are for safety, law and order, multi-racial culture, environment and the people of Singapore.

Perhaps Singapore can be a better place to live, if the cost of living can be kept lower by reducing tax and government charges, and giving better wages to younger people and the lower income workers. We need social and economic policies that are more egalitarian and fairer to the people.

“Decisive” budget does not address long-term inadequacies in the corporatist model

2009-01-28T15:57:00.001+08:00

http://208.79.203.2/~wayangpa/?p=4648

Written by Eugene Yeo and Jeremy Koh | 28 January 2009

PRIME Minister Lee Hsien Loong has described the $20.5 billion Resilience Package as a ‘very decisive Budget’ that aims to help see Singaporeans through the difficult economic times ahead.

Much has been said about the Budget lately with most PAP ministers and MPs, labor union leaders, employers and ordinary Singaporeans echoing the Prime Minister’s words.

The package consists chiefly of measures to help companies save jobs, retain workers and to keep them afloat during the economic downturn. Measures to help households include doubling of GST credits and a personal income tax rebate of 20% which was unchanged from last year.

The government had argued that the most effective way to help Singaporeans cope with the recession is to save their jobs through supporting the employers. However, it does little to address glaring long-term deficiencies in our corporatist economic model.

The S$20.5 billion ($13.7 billion) package — a whopping 8% of GDP — looks like past stimulus plans instead of a forward looking economic blueprint to retool our export-oriented economy.

Why does Singapore suffer the most from the global economic turmoil as compared to our nearest neighbor Malaysia ?

For far too long, we have been overly dependent on external trade while certain government policies like the compulsory CPF saving scheme and the high prices of public housing squeeze the middle class dry and dilute their spending power in the domestic economy.

Singapore’s economy would be more resilient if it were better balanced. Consumption composes only about 40% of GDP — far less than other developed Asian economies, nearer to 55%. (read Wall Street Journal’s commentary here)

The best way to prevent companies from retrenching workers and shutting down is to provide a steady flow of businesses for them. Only when there is demand will there be supply. The government’s incentives to the business sector are only temporary measures to tide them over these hard times and does not generate a demand for their services or products.

Why is our domestic consumption so low as compared to other developed Asian countries like Japan, South Korea or Hong Kong ?

Take the example the average Singapore worker earning a median pay of $2,500 a month to support his family of four - his wife and two children. He takes home $2,000 after contributing 20% of his pay to his CPF. Assuming his CPF is enough to pay for his monthly mortage, all he has is $2,000 for the living expenses of his entire family. How much spare cash does he still have to spend ?

The limited spending power of Singapore’s middle class is the real scourge of the current malaise pervading every sector of our economy and we will be able to shower the storm better had we have a greater domestic consumption.

The GST credits and personal income tax rebates provide more relief to the lower-income group who does not spend much anyway than the middle income group.
We propose two measures which will put extra cash in the pockets of the middle class almost immediately:

1. Decoupling the price of newly built HDB flats from the resale market:

New HDB flats are currently sold at 70% of the resale value of neighoring flats. With the HDB resale market being popped up artificially by downgraders from private homes and foreigners, this impose a heavy strain financially on newly-wed couples looking for their first home.

Public housing must be kept cheap and its prices should reflect current economic realities on the ground. Singaporeans should not be allowed to spend more than a certain percentage, e.g. 15% of their monthly salaries on servicing their housing loans. Those whose incomes failed to reach the benchmark should be offered rental flats instead.

The prices of new HDB flats should be pegged to the median pay of the average Singapore worker, calculated based on the amount the average worker will need to fork out over a 30 year period. For example, 15% of $2,500 gives us a monthly installment of $375, and a loan of $135,000 which middle-income households can afford easily.

2. Reducing employeers’ CPF contribution to 10% or less:

An extra 10% cash for each Singapore worker to bring home monthly will translate to greater spending power beyond basic subsistence levels.

Less Singaporeans will need cash handouts which the government can redirect to give more to the lower-income groups to lift them out of poverty.

Upon the recovery of the economy, Singaporeans can be encouraged to buy life annuities and health insurances from private insurance firms to supplement their CPF and medisave.

CPF has already failed in its original function of serving as retirement funds for Singaporeans. How many of us can afford to depend on our CPF when we retire ? The government should stop meddling in the personal finances of its citizens and allowed them to manage their own hard-earned savings.

Singaporeans have one of the highest saving rates in the world at 34.5%. We are also home to the richest sovereign wealth funds in the region with Temasek and GIC amassing assets of more than $100 billion dollars combined. Why then do we have less spending power compared to our counterparts elsewhere ? Why can’t we retire comfortably in our golden years and instead have to continue working for as long as we can ? Why are there still homeless Singaporeans with no roofs over their heads in a developed country like ours ?

There is something fundamentally wrong in our corporatist model and it is time we rectify it. Singaporeans from three generations - our grandparents, parents and now ourselves have contributed immensely to build up these SWFs through our CPF contributions and HDB flats purchases and yet they can afford to lose billion of dollars in failed overseas investments with impunity.

Reducing both the employees’ CPF contribution and prices of new HDB flats will benefit every Singaporean far more than GST credits and cash handouts. It is time we reduce our contribution to Temasek and GIC unless they are made to be accountable to the people like the Norwegian Pension Fund which publishes an annual statement of account for every Norwegian with a stake in it.

Singapore's Limits - It's time to rethink the corporatist model.

2009-01-28T15:49:00.002+08:00

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123264905073306835.html

Excerpts:

The export-led economy is falling on its face.

Singapore's economy would be more resilient if it were better balanced.

The government could unleash more productive, sustainable growth by trimming back its public sector and allowing the economy to diversify on its own.

The best help for Singaporeans would be expanded, permanent opportunities to work, save and invest with more of their own money, rather than relying on government to do it for them.

Budget : Where are the safety nets?

2009-01-28T14:39:00.001+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/01/budget-where-are-safety-nets.html

Written by Lucky Tan | 24 January 2009

The day after the "Resilence Budget" was announce, Straits Times was filled with articles on how it will save jobs and help Singaporeans during the impending hard times. The budget attempts to save jobs by giving companies a wage credit. The govt will subsidize up to 12% of the first $2500 of wages. This was reported as an innovative new idea to save jobs. I figured this is probably a rehash of an old idea - in the 1980s recession, employer's CPF contribution was slashed to lower the wage bills of companies. The lower wage bill helped to save jobs in the 80s recession. This time the govt probably wanted to do the same but cutting CPF is not possible because there is not much left to cut and many depend on it to service their HDB loans. The only way to lower the wage bill was for the govt to subsidize wages. However, this move will not save as many jobs as it did in the 80s. If you recall the 80s recession was caused in part by the loss of competitiveness due to the NWC recommending wages to be increased too quickly, the cut in wages helped Singapore to restore its competitiveness thereby saving jobs. This recession is very different. It is triggered by a massive abrupt collapse of external demand. Wages are not the issue - they are losing jobs by the tens of millions in China where the wages are the lowest in the world. Cutting wages will have a limited impact on retrenchments. Companies need to shed capacity because there is no demand for goods produced- Intel, Nokia, Microsoft, DBS etc etc have decided to cut jobs and these are companies that are still cash rich and competitive. When Lim Swee Say "scolded" DBS for retrenching staff instead of cutting pay, DBS replied that cutting pay is not the answer because certain segments of their business will not be revived for years and they just don't need headcount.

What is going to happen is quite predictable. There will be widespread retrenchments and our unemployment rate will rise because the measures in the budget will have limited impact. A few months ago, Alex Au wrote that it is time for safety nets to be in place. I agree with him completely. These can be removed once the crisis is over and jobs are plentiful again. A survey done recently showed that 30% of Singaporeans are worried about retrenchments ...they believe they will be retrenched. The last time something so abrupt happened was during the Asian Crisis. People simply queue up around the block at the MP office to seek help because they don't know what to do when they become desperate. The MP had to decide what help to give on the spot. It is all very unsystematic and haphazard. Its the worst way to dispense help. This is a crisis people need to clear about where to seek help, how they will qualify for help and what help is given so they can at least plan when the situation deteriorates. Many Singaporeans will become jobless through no fault of their own and many have no savings because of the rising cost of living made it difficult for them to save. We will face a problem for which the budget offers no solution.

I have long thought there will be a serious situation which will cause the PAP govt to overcome its aversion to giving help to Singaporeans when they really need it. When the crisis came, I thought "this is it"...they will have to do it. Afterall, Singaporeans contributed to the massive reserves which are meant for rainy days. The crisis we are seeing is a once in a lifetime event....for once in our life, our govt has a chance to lift you up when you go down. But the PAP helped to recapitalise Western banks with our reserves instead. There was no scrutiny when tens of billions are lost in those banks but when it comes to helping Singaporeans directly with the reserves the PAP just can't do it. Our PM recently brought up his fear of Singaporeans cultivating a sense of entitlement and dependency when the govt gives help - that is why there is no direct help for Singaporeans?! It is like not sending the fire fighters when someone's home is getting burnt because you think that the people will abuse the fire engines by not taking measures to prevent fires in their own homes. But this time someone threw a lighted match into our backyard, it is global systemic crisis and ordinary Singaporeans will get into trouble through no fault of their own. This is not a time to teach your citizens lessons about being self reliant or worry about entitlement mentality. The last time our PM was very worried....it was about he and his minister colleagues being not paid enough and he fought hard for the pay he believed they were entitled to. Isn't it time to worry about jobless Singaporeans who cannot afford the basic necessities? ....When will he fight for us?

Read our blogsite on mobile phone

2009-01-28T12:36:00.003+08:00

The tkl100kpetition.blogspot.com can now be read on mobile phones.

The webpage address is tiny.cc/sg

Happy Lunar New Year

2009-01-26T00:01:00.003+08:00

The following seasons greeting, sent by Mr Tan Kin Lian, is forwarded to us by one of the volunteers.

Obama to receive Singapore plea

2009-01-24T05:57:00.004+08:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7841485.stm

Extract:

Chee Soon Juan, secretary general of the Singapore Democratic Party, posted his "message to President Obama" on the video sharing website YouTube.

The "Yes We Can" Barack Obama Music Video

Empathy for Tan Yong Soon....

2009-01-21T13:16:00.001+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/01/empathy-for-tan-yong-soon.html

Written by LuckySingaporean on 21 Jan 09

I applaud the numerous netizens who have stepped forward to show support for Mr. Tan[Link]. A number have worked with him and described him as affable, professional and humble. I wrote yesterday that Peter Ho and Teo Chee Hean's expectations for top civil servants were unrealistic and unfair. Some people might have felt better if Mr. Tan had kept his trip secret but does that change anything for you?...However, netizens cannot be blamed for the emotional outburst - that too has a logic if we look back in time.....

In the 80s, a whole generation of people was elevated from poverty. They went from being kampung dwellers without clean water, sanitation and electricity to be HDB dwellers. When I was a boy I did my business in a longkang (drain) and let the water wash away the produce. The drain was far better than the stinking jambans (wooden toilets) that had no flushing system. Moving to a HDB flat (bought for $40K) was considered a luxury...and to be able to flush away the stuff by pulling a handle was a miracle. While the wages were lower at that time, medical care, transport and housing were all affordable. ...and people were able retire at age 55. We were told our civil servants were excellent and all of us believe it. they were the architect of the miracle. When you go to the toilet and pulled that handle it reminded you of how much things had improved. When a vigorous young Goh Chok Tong ran for PM, he made a bold promise that we will all be eating Swiss fondue in a few years. It was a promise that cannot be fulfiled but few blamed the likeable Goh as external factors can be seen to be responsible for the broken promise. Things started to change 10-15 yrs ago, when the interests of the govt and the people diverge. Elitism started to take root in govt and combined with their interests in GLCs they pursued policies that did not benefit a large segment of the population. The income gap grew as the PAP govt hike its own pay and that of its top civil servants to a level that people in other countries think is a joke when you tell them. All this while poverty started to spread.....you just have to open your eyes to see it, from the aged cleaner to the old man digging dustbins for aluminium cans. ..and you see it when the economy was supposed to be booming in 2007. The PAP implemented policies that hurt the ordinary Singaporeans - high prices of HDB flats, opening the floodgates to foreign workers just for the extra % points of GDP growth causing structural unemployment, hiking the GST to cut corporate tax when profits as a % of GDP was at an all time high. ...all this while ordinary Singaporeans were hurting badly. The straw that broken camel's back was the pay hikes for the ministers ....they elevated themselves to god-like creatures without which the country will sink to justify those hikes.

There is a reason why people are very angry and it has little to do with Tan Yong Soon learning French cooking...that article was just a spark that lit a fire. There is still plenty of firewood left for many fires to come.

"And they came for me" by Lasantha Wickramatunga

2009-01-21T11:52:00.000+08:00

http://www.thesundayleader.lk/20090111/editorial-.htm

Found this from
http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2009/01/and-they-came-for-me-by-lasantha-wickramatunga.html

Extract:

On January 8, 2009, Lasantha Wickramatunga the editor of The Sunday Leader in Sri Lanka, was shot dead by two gunmen on a motorcycle (see also Huffington Post).

This is an editorial he wrote, chillingly written with an awareness that his days were numbered.

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

PAP MP floats idea of minimum wage, criticizes ‘overheated’ growth model

2009-01-21T11:30:00.000+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/archives/5175

Tuesday, 20 January 2009, 5:51 pm | 919 views
Choo Zheng Xi / Editor-in-Chief

“If we would like to see Singapore moving up as one of the most developed countries in the world, and costs increase accordingly, lower income Singaporeans might need a minimum wage to survive.”

A minimum wage law was a constant theme of the late opposition icon Mr Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam, and more recently canvassed by ex-NTUC Income CEO Mr Tan Kin Lian. But yesterday the minimum wage was canvassed by an unlikely proponent: businessman and People’s Action Party (PAP) Member of Parliament, Mr Inderjit Singh.

Speaking in his personal capacity at the Institute of Policy Studies’ (IPS) Singapore Perspectives 2009 seminar, Mr Singh said that cheap foreign labor had depressed wages, and this hurt low income Singaporeans the most.

“As we brought in more and more people, many from India and China, not just at the top level of talent, but also at various levels including unskilled workers, we depressed wages of Singaporeans”, he said.

Noting that the problem of low wages was exacerbated by a high cost society, he added:

“Our costs continued to go up. So we caused a double whammy for Singaporeans who had no choice but to live with the high cost of living while having to accept lower wages”.

Minimum wage a possible solution

One way of solving this problem, he said, could be a minimum wage policy.

Speaking to TOC after his speech, he acknowledged that a minimum wage would be an additional cost to business, but that the government was in a position to draw up a scheme to make it workable.

Noting that the government was “unlikely to move very quickly on this”, he nevertheless emphasized its importance.

“If we would like to see Singapore moving up as one of the most developed countries in the world, and costs increase accordingly, lower income Singaporeans might need a minimum wage to survive.”

One way of doing it, Mr Singh suggested, was “either we incentivize companies to implement it, or the government has to supplement wages to a minimum level.”

Mr Singh favoured an incremental introduction of a minimum wage policy, as companies might not immediately adapt well to such a policy in the current economic downturn.

To begin with, the government could work within the existing Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) framework to level up wages. Mr Singh suggested including workers earning up to $2,000 in the scheme. The current scheme covers only those earning up to $1,500. He also suggested giving payouts on a monthly basis instead of the current six-monthly payout.

Growth at all costs a mistake

In the course of his presentation, Mr Singh was critical of several of the aspects of the Singaporean growth model, which he characterized as “growth at all costs”.

He raised the problem of high business costs not matched by productivity, tracing it to the government’s fixation with moving up the manufacturing value chain too quickly.

Mr Singh told the audience of 700 that a growth driven policy had “dislodge[d] Singapore’s economy, workforce, and other infrastructure”. He felt that a “slower rate of development, encouraging the stretching of domestic capabilities and technologies, would keep industries in Singapore for a longer period of time”.

He was also critical of what he called the government’s approach to “disincentivize companies from trying to keep many of what the government considered as no longer attractive capabilities in Singapore”, which he felt had led to too high a turnover in Singapore’s core competencies and had “made it difficult for Singaporeans and firms to cope”.

Moving ahead, Mr Singh proposed a model he felt was more sustainable:

“The suggested model should involve a moderation of cost while Singapore’s core competencies are strengthened…We must avoid any “boom and bust” type of policies, which go for broke in good times and slow down when the world economy grows.”

——-

Note:

In 2008, Mr Inderjit also criticised the “growth at all cost” policy. He “pointed out that the “grow-at-all-costs” policy of the government might have overheated the economy and worsened the income divide… “I feel a significant part of the inflation has been caused by factors that we could have controlled.

“In the last two years, the government has contributed to inflation by allowing multiple cost increases, both directly or through policy changes that resulted in cost increases.

“The end result is an era of very high cost increases, high inflation not supported by enough wage increases, especially for the lower and lower middle income Singaporeans and companies.” (Channel NewsAsia)

———

Read Channel NewsAsia’s latest report (20 Jan 2009): Average household income up across all income groups in 2008.

Atrocious spin by CNA about rising household income and decreased income inequality in 2008

2009-01-21T10:40:00.000+08:00

http://wayangparty.com/2009/01/21/atrocious-spin-by-cna-about-rising-household-income-and-decreased-income-inequality-in-2008/

By Eugene Yeo, Chief Editor

I am most dismayed and disgusted with this atrocious spin by CNA to add a fake sweetener to the real economic situation on the ground:

From CNA:

SPIN No 1: There is a significant growth of 13% in median monthly household income

“The median monthly household income among all resident households grew 13 per cent from S$4,380 in 2007 to S$4,950 in 2008. After adjusting for higher consumer price inflation, households enjoyed real growth of 6.2 per cent last year, compared to 7.2 per cent in 2007.”

SPIN No 2: The government has contributed to the narrowed income inequality

“With faster income growth among the 21st to 90th percentile of employed households, income inequality narrowed – the Gini coefficient, which measures income inequality, shrank from 0.489 in 2007 to 0.481 in 2008 for the first time in a decade. The government’s Surplus Sharing Package also helped to reduce the income disparity further in 2008. After adjusting for government benefits and taxes, the Gini coefficient among employed households was reduced to 0.462 in 2008, compared to 0.479 in 2007.”

Now, let me dissect Spin no 1 first.

The quoted figure of 13% is utterly meaningless since it does not take inflation into account and serves no purpose other than misleading readers into thinking that there is a hefty increase in the median monthly income from $4, 380 in 2007 to $4,980 in 2008 which will be an additional $600 to each family.

In fact, if you read closely the sentence which follows thereafter, the median monthly household income in 2008 grows only 6.2% after factoring in inflation which is less than the 7.2% in 2007.

A 6.2% increase in the 2008 median monthly household income of S$4,380 will only contribute an additional $271.56 to the family and to many Singaporeans, this pathetic amount is literally insignificant. Assuming a family save the entire S$271.56 each month, it will amount to only $3,258.72 or only about $800 per head for a family of four.

Spin no 2 gives Singaporeans the impression that the government has helped to narrow the income gap between the rich and the poor. However, it fails to mention how that our Gini Coefficient of 0.481 was pretty high among developed countries and the decrease of 0.008 was minuscule to say the least.

The Gini coefficient is a measure of statistical dispersion most prominently used as a measure of inequality of income distribution or inequality of wealth distribution. The Gini index is the Gini coefficient expressed as a percentage.

It is defined as a ratio with values between 0 and 1: A low Gini coefficient indicates more equal income or wealth distribution, while a high Gini coefficient indicates more unequal distribution. 0 corresponds to perfect equality (everyone having exactly the same income) and 1 corresponds to perfect inequality (where one person has all the income, while everyone else has zero income).

According to the latest Human Development Report 2007/2008 published by the United Nations, Singapore has a Gini Index of 42.5 which is equivalent of a Gini Coefficient of 0.425 (I am not sure why the figures used by the UN differs from Singapore’s)

Singapore is ranked 25th in terms of Human Development Index by the United Nations. Among the top 30 countries in terms of human development, a hallmark of first world nations, Singapore has the highest Gini Index and hence the greatest income gap.

In fact, Singapore’s Gini Index is closer to Third World countries like Kenya (42.5), Ghana (40.8), Turkmenistan (40. and Nicaragua (43.1) which are much further down the pecking order rather than to developed countries like Norway (25.8), Sweden (25.0), Japan (24.9) and Denmark (24.7).

Isn’t it strange that Singapore has a GDP which is close to Japan, but the same Gini Index as Kenya ? This can only be possible in a country with the highest income group living an affluent life like the Japanese and the lowest income group struggling to make a living like the Kenyanese.

CNA mentioned that this is the first time that Singapore’s Gini Coefficient has decreased in a decade. This means that Singapore’s income gap has widened during the last 10 years of strong robust economic growth with the rich growing richer and the poor growing poorer as a result of the PAP’s economic policies.

Why did CNA deliberately leave out such critical information to mislead its readers, giving it the wrong impression that the PAP has done a good job with the economy ? Does it owe allegiance to Singaporeans or the PAP ? How many readers have been hoodhinked again by yet another blatant attempt at misinforming and misleading the public by the state media ?

Precisely because we are facing an unprecedented national crisis, all the more the mainstream media should adhere to basic journalistic standards of objectivity to give citizens a fair, accurate and balanced perspective of issues concerning their daily lives. Sugar-coating the harsh reality will do more harm than good in giving false hope to a bleak outlook instead of preparing Singaporeans to expect the worst.

Government to dip into reserves

2009-01-19T16:20:00.005+08:00

SM Goh said that the government could dipping into the "carefully-guarded reserves of the country". He added that "it's a difficult decision, because once you do that you may open the reserves for future demands which may not justify the use of the reserves. So, it's an issue that the Prime Minister is thinking over very carefully."

The report also said that the proposal "has to be justified to the President... so, that's an issue which Finance Minister and the Prime Minister would have to deliberate quite carefully." But would they?

The impression one gets is that the President is a de-facto defender of the country's reserves; so given a very conservative government to begin with, this can only mean that any amount approved will be, well, extremely conservative. But should there be a situation where circumstances warrant a more significant outlay to aid struggling Singaporeans, would a President who has risen from the ranks of the government, the same people would have put him up as candidate in 1999, make a difference? How robust can our President's assessments be?

We shall see...

Jas

The issue of national security

2009-01-19T10:07:00.003+08:00

http://timsblogfromaustralia.blogspot.com/2009/01/issue-of-national-security.html

Written by Tim on 16 Jan 09

Just yesterday, Mr. Wong Kan Seng, Minister of Home Affairs, in Singapore gave an interview that focused broadly on the goals for 2009, and the security concerns for this year.

While I do agree broadly with what he says, I do however have some questions. First up however is that I don't doubt his sincerity. I do believe that he does have the country's interest in his heart, and there's no doubt that in 2009, due in part of what has happened internationally, that our security remains one of the most paramount concerns, and we should not let our guard down, whether is it cyberterrorism, or is it terrorism, and the fight against extremists.

The question I have basically is this: in light what happened almost 12 months ago, in the case of the escape of Mas Selamat, what Mr. Wong did didn't reflect the tough words he said. While it is easy to say, its not easy to do. And the fact is that the prisoner wasn't put under full observance, not completely under surveillance and was allowed to go to rooms to do whatever he was pleased. The structure of the detention centre was also significantly compromised, which would give an open invitation to anyone who has the audacity to try. Besides the appointment of the director of the department comes under him, the minister of home affairs. And if the director agreed to put Selamat there, then the Home Affairs minister would have known and agreed to it.

And then in light of the escape, the Home Affairs ministry didn't fully issue a full bulletin that had the full description of Selamat until 2 days after he escaped. In this day and age, where people just need to board a boat or a plane and be on the other side of the world within 24 hours, the response in catching was too slow, and hence the search for Selamat in the next two, three months were simply too little, too late.

I compare the political response to the one in India after the Mumbai attacks in November 2008 later, and I know the Minister in charge of the interior- equivalent to the Home Affairs- resigned in disgrace, knowing that the Mumbai attacks was a failure because he was also in charge of the intelligence services, which didn't detect any plans by terrorists until it was too late. If the Indian side can resign to take responsibility, why didn't our minister do the same...because it was under his watch when it happened?

In the end, a politicised Home Affairs ministry compromises our national security. Mr. Wong has his reasons to stay on, and while I respect his position and his stance, I do not fully agree an apology is sufficient enough, even 1 year since it has happened. As such, Mr. Wong's words don't match his actions, and I'm afraid there are questions that has to be asked about his leadership.

At a perilous time such as this, its time Singapore have a Minister of Home Affairs who's fully committed to protecting Singapore's national security and her people, rather than one who has been so keen to protect his own, till the point he somehow compromises Singapore's and her people's.

Become our supporters

2009-01-19T06:41:00.006+08:00

We came across an article from one of our supporters.

The full article here:

Mr Tan Kin Lian and his bid for political office.

I am pleased to have discovered (I had intended to ask him on ToC) that Mr. Tan had a small (I assume?) group of volunteers working to help him manage his bid - first, I assume, on his attempt to gather 100,000 signatures and second, on an actual platform for either contesting the Elected Presidency or as an MP.

Here's the link to his volunteer blog (as part of their effort to publicize this):

So, please do visit the site (read my comments - I'm not encouraging you to go to his site and blindly sign up, I'm encouraging people to find out more about him and engage him).

A few personal comments:

1) What has impressed me about Mr. Tan is his willingness to engage with people, even with people he does not agree with. So, feel free to study his statements and leave comments for him and his volunteers.

2) I've signed the petition. I had initially indicated that he ought to go for the Elected Presidency, but I've thought further about it and realized that the office is really a basket-case. Even if Mr. Tan succeeded in overcoming the number of ridiculous barriers set up to even qualify for running for the office (International readers would be aghast at this!), he would be effectively handicapped if he were successfully elected (Mr. Ong Teng Cheong, the first elected President, was a former ruling party stalwart and even he was shut out when he tried to do his job as President.

Now I think he is better off forming an independent team of MP candidates to contest a GRC.

3) Decide for yourself if he is worth supporting. I am encouraging him to run because he is a breath of fresh air in Singapore politics. Someone who is willing to listen, willing to talk (rather than talk-down) to people, willing to be civil (rather than defensive) about disagreements and shows an active empathy with people in trouble (rather than stay silent and praying the problem "goes away").

DEMOCRACY ... by Ho Cheow Seng

2009-01-19T01:01:00.000+08:00

During the home-run to the U.S. Presidency 2008, I read with amusement various quarters online talking about waiting for a 'Singaporean Obama' to come to the rescue of Singapore.

The fact is that if the situation in Singapore were that dreadful, we most certainly would not sit back and wait for the 'messiah' to come to our rescue. Rather, while waiting for the 'Singaporean Obama' to appear we would have got down to start paving the way for his messianic appearance in all its glory, and so begin right now to set the Democratic process going, hadn't we?

The point I'm driving home is that Democracy in America and the West did not just happen with the wave of a wand. And Democracy as it is practised in America today is only 40 years old, though the U.S as a Nation was founded on July 4, 1776.

I may also add that in the run-up to the recently concluded U.S. Presidential Election, there were many who harboured doubts that finally, the majority of white American voters would really vote for an African-American. And the fact that they in fact did was what caused that 'spontaneous overflow of powerful emotion' and euphoria, all of which no doubt contributed to making the November 2008 American Presidential Election a historic occasion of momentous significance.

Just as Rome was not built in a day, so a Democracy as it is understood and practised in the West cannot be established overnight. Now why do I emphasize the point about 'Democracy as it is practised in the West? The explanation is provided by the many other countries in the world that also subscribe to Democracy. As a concept, Democracy means different things to the different leaders and peoples of the world.

The late Chairman Mao Ze-dong also believed in Democracy. To Chairman Mao, Democracy meant 'freedom from foreign domination and exploitation, freedom from hunger and disease, and the opportunity for the Chinese people to build a just and caring society where the principle of "From each according to his ability, and to each according to his needs" might be implemented. [In this instance, some people might justifiably say that Mao was more of a romantic than a political reformer. But let me not digress and distract you, the reader.]

Then again in America, the staunchest proponent of Democracy in the world, capital punishment is still carried out while in other Democratic countries like Australia, that form of punishment is considered inhumane and a blatant transgression of the very principles of 'human rights' considered as the very essence of Democracy by the great majority of Australians.

Our very own Republic of Singapore also believes in "a Democratic Society based on justice and equality... ...", and a society where every citizen is expected to contribute according to his ability and will be rewarded in direct proportion to his contribution. So who has the right to dictate what Democracy should mean for this whole world?

The point here really is, that Democracy certainly cannot be a 'one size fits all' system of governance. For it to work effectively and meaningfully, it has to take into consideration differences in situation and circumstances, differences in terms of religion and culture, and the individual country's natural endowments, particular needs and constraints.

Democracy is by no means a manual of instructions or even a set of guidelines to follow for the establishment of a just, humane and an equitable socitey where all its citizens, without exception, are equal before the laws of the land. Democracy entails a process over time to attain to full maturity.

Also, Freedom is not a birth-right but a privilege to be earned. And until one understands that one's freedom to smoke as and when/where one likes , one must also take full cognizance of another's freedom to be able to breathe unpolluted, fresh air, we have quite some steep slope to climb before we reach the peak of our endeavour.

Indeed for Democracy to succeed one needs to understand that the moment one chooses to be a member of a community for security or protection, and for a more meaningful and an enriching life, one must be prepared to surrender a measure of individual rights and freedom for the greater good of the community of which one is a member.

Indeed there is no Democracy anywhere on this planet that grants its citizens unbridled freedom. For when this happens CHAOS takes over the reins from Democracy and the outcome is lawlessness and mayhem. For sure, Democracy does not confer on the individual the right to do the wrong.

This leads us to the all-important question of educating the people for the successful implementation of the Democratic model as a form of governance. And as educating the people is a time-consuming process and in direct relation to the rate that a people is capable of learning, so to that extent is the implementation of the Democratic process facilitated or hindered. In other words, the speed with which Democracy may be implemented will be depend upon a people's capacity for learning.

The message here is that evolution over revolution is the civilized route to take in our aspiration to bring about the changes that would enhance the overall well-being of our people. Evolution takes time at the same time as it takes people through a process of learning. And it is precisely this learning process that is so crucial to the success of any model of Democracy.

Revolution, on the other hand, brings about the possibility or opportunity to bring about change overnight without the people at large necessarily knowing how to go about helping to formulate and implement the change(s) that they seek.

The choice as to the route to take must by now be clear for those who cherish peaceful and sustainable change.

Ho Cheow Seng

18/01/2009

Ask Singapore government a question or give a suggestion

2009-01-18T07:07:00.014+08:00

We informed people about the "Tell Singapore Government" subsite and have received some interesting reaction at some forums.

See: 3in1 Kopitiam, Sam's Alfresco Coffee, Singapore Kopitiam, SgForums

Our responses to some of the comments are listed below. If we are not answering some other specific questions, that is because we do not know how.

1. If you want to know if your questions or suggestions are of interest to other people, pose them at our subsite and then let people vote with their nick names or anonymously.

2. Some people may not want to respond to your forum views with their own opinion. There could be many reasons. Some choose to remain silent. Others may not be able to express themselves as well as some of the other forum writers. Now they can use our subsite to express agree or disagree, and the rest of us can see the overall opinion.

3. Some asked specific questions for Tan Kin Lian, eg whatever he did at NTUC, his previous political affiliation. Look guys, we are not Tan Kin Lian. You can write to him directly. Some of us here are also watching to see how he responds.

4. We currently have some simple ground rules, ie, no vulgarities, nothing to incite racial or religious tension, or anything that we think is "not appropriate". If you can help to expand the rules, we are more than happy to use your opinion.

5. A guy asked if we are a "new-PAP TLK dog". There are 107 members in our internal circulation list currently. We do not know most of the personal details of these people, except for the fact that they have signed the petition and told us they want further updates on the petition effort.

6. One asked why "such a hurry to ask questions when the GE has not been called, and TKL has not been elected". We say, why do we need to wait till GE then ask questions?

7. Another said "For donkey years, singaporeans have been posting thousands, if not millions, of feedback, suggestion, complaint, redress, concern etc, one way or another, to this govt. Has it make any difference so far? Or put it this. Where these are leading?" We say, if you have already given up then we respect your attitude. We are not.

Volunteers for TKL

--------

We now added a "Suggestions" topic. You could now also pose suggestions to help improve anything that you see.

We have also changed the moderator series name to "Tell Singapore Government" to reflect the "suggestion/question" approach.

Go here.

-------

We have set up a Google moderator group called "Ask Singapore Government".

It allows people to submit questions and let others vote whether they like or dislike the questions.

You can also do it anonymously.

Ground rules: No obscenity, nothing to incite racial hatred, and anything that we feel is "not appropriate" please.

We have also linked it from our "Ask Singapore Government" section at this website.

Help FAQ from Google

What is a topic?

A topic is a subject within a series. For example, if you create a series of 'Book clubs' for your organization, topics could be 'Fiction,' 'Non-fiction,' or 'Auto-biographies.'

How do I vote to get an existing question asked?

If you see a question that's been submitted, you can vote to recommend that it's asked. To do so, simply click the checkmark button. You can also click the X button if you'd like to vote against an existing question. When you mouse over the bars, you'll see the number of votes that have already been submitted.

How do I add a question?

You can either submit a question or vote on a question that's already been asked; all you need is a Google Account to sign in. At the bottom of the topic page, just click the Suggest a question button.

How do I comment on a question?

In addition to voting in favor of or against a question, if you own a series you'll also be able to post comments on questions. Just click Post a response and you can share your thoughts on the question with other participants.

How are questions ranked on the page?

Questions on the Google Moderator page are automatically ranked based on how many positive votes they have. If a question has 100 total votes of which 50 are positive and 50 are negative votes, it will be ranked lower than a question with 90 total votes, of which 85 are positive and only 5 are negative.

Can I delete a question?

If you'd like to remove a question you submitted, just click the Remove link next to your question. It'll be removed from the presentation and topic view, and will no longer be associated with your account.

What happens when something is flagged as inappropriate?

The people voting in this series have flagged this submission as inappropriate and the people that created this series agree. As a result this submission will no longer appear as a featured question.

Can I vote anonymously?

The creator of the series has the option to allow or disallow anonymous posts.

What does the question with the blue background mean?

The question highlighted in blue is a random question that you haven't seen yet; in drawing attention to a random question, it gives viewers the opportunity to vote on a question that might not be ranked at the top yet.

How do I create a series to moderate?

To create a new series, click the Create Series button and enter the title and description. You can also invite others who may want to edit the event to own the series.

Volunteers for TKL

We have set up a communication list for people who replied

2009-01-16T07:16:00.006+08:00

We have currently set up a Google Group mailing list to keep people updated on our work progress, meetings etc. This is only for people who have signed the petition.

There are currently 107 members in this list. We hope this list will grow.

If you wish to join, please write to tkl.volunteers@gmail.com. We need you to tell us who you are because we need to verify if you have signed the petition. Thank you.

Volunteers for TKL

************************

"Yes, I would like to receive your regular updates. It is time and timely for Change. I wish Mr Tan success in his campaign and if I can be of further help, let me know."
"Thanks you for the information and also hats of to you guys for the work.
Please update me on the latest news on Mr T K L."
"after so many months and all he has is 1119 signatures, i think its a foregone conclusion, he should not proceed with his bid. obviously there are many who remember him from his days as the ceo of ntuc income and i have received uncomplimentary feedback about him. i have tried to interest my friends and associates to sign up for him but they declined. i suppose it is his past catching up with him and i wonder what he can do to make up for it.
good luck to you."
"Yes, Pls update me accordingly and appreciate your selfless, noble volunteering. Keep up the good work. :)"
"yes, like to rec'd yr updates."
"No, please do not send me any further updates. Please tell Mr Tan K L to go ahead and stand for election, either for President or MP as I believe each of the signatures represents 100 citizens of our Silent Majority. Singaporeans are fearful of speaking up or putting their signatures on paper even though they believe the action is just and proper. I do not think it is possible to obtain the 100,000 signatures as targeted by Mr Lim. "
"Yes, please."
“Yes please include me. I definitely want to know how you are progressing. Wished I could volunteer and help out too but I am staying in Melbourne.”
“YES.........certainly.”
"YES. Please update me in future"
"Yes, u can send me updates on this matter."
"Yes, yes,yes."
"I know Mr Tan Kin Lian very well (not personally) and built up a fair bit of investment at Income when he was CEO. I emailed to him my sadness when he announced he was leaving income suddenly. I have high regards for his professionalism in building up income, giving good returns for our investments. I am a regular visitor to his blog and is following the developments closely. thank you"
"YES. UPDATE ME."
"yes, please continue to keep me updated."
"KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!"
"Yes"

-----------------------------
From: Volunteers for Tan Kin Lian
Subject: Update on the Petition for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for Public Office
To: tkl.volunteers@gmail.com
Cc: tkl100kpetition.peoplesay@blogger.com
Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 6:38 AM

Dear Sir/Madam

We are volunteers helping in the petition is to call for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for election, either as the Elected President or Member of Parliament of Singapore. More than 1,100 persons have signed the petition so far.

From our records, your email address has been listed as having signed the online petition and we appreciate your effort for doing so.

We would like to take this opportunity to update you further on who is Tan Kin Lian as well as to update you on our efforts so far.

Who is Tan Kin Lian?

Mr Tan Kin Lian joined NTUC Income in 1977 and was the CEO from 1994 to 2007. He is recently involved in several public activities, including helping investors to deal with possible mis-selling of financial products (eg Lehman Brothers Minibond).

Mr Tan wrote about his efforts at his blogsite, http://tankinlian.blogspot.com

Around end of 2008, a petition was organised to call for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for election either as the Elected President or Member of Parliament of Singapore.

Mr Tan Kin Lian said if 100,000 signatures could be gathered for the petition, he would respond to the public call. Read a news report here: http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_305814.html

Update From Us

We are a group of Singaporeans who have volunteered to help. We believe that the aims of the petition is to get more Singaporeans aware that they now have a choice for a potential candidate for public office.

The volunteers have set up a website at http://tkl100kpetition.blogspot.com. We hope this website could serve as a place for us to update you on the progress of the petition. Please feel free to drop by the site. We will also update information that we feel might be of interest to you. We would also appreciate very much feedback and comments from you.

What You Could Do Next

We hope you could also help to publicise our website and invite your friends to sign the petition form at our petition website. Through your support, we believe Singaporeans would be empowered on a journey to decide on whether they need a new representative to be the voice for the people. If you have family members or friends who have never voted in an election before, you can help inform them that by signing the petition they would now have an opportunity to do so.

If you wish to receive further updates from us on our progress, we would appreciate if you could reply "Yes" to this email to indicate so. Otherwise, since we do not have your permission, we will not be sending you any further updates through email.

Thank you very much and we would like to take this opportunity to wish you a happy new year.

Yours sincerely,

Volunteers for Tan Kin Lian Petition

WARNING: "Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance thereon. Please notify the sender immediately if you receive this in error. Thank you."

Did Khaw close one eye to ‘one-eyed dragon’’s ‘gift’ to Tang Wee Sung?

2009-01-13T08:44:00.001+08:00

http://wayangparty.com/2009/01/12/did-khaw-close-one-eye-to-one-eyed-dragons-gift-to-tang-wee-sung/

Posted by wayangparty on January 12, 2009

By Eugene Yeo, Senior writer

When triad leader “One-eyed dragon” Tan Chor Jin was hung last Friday, his organs were donated to others, including Mr Tang Wee Sung who got one of his kidneys.

Mr Tang was arrested and convicted on charges of attempting to buy a kidney for an Indonesian.

Though Mr Tan and Mr Tang do not know each other, Mr Tan has indicated his wish to donate his kidney to Mr Tang. This has set the internet chatrooms buzzing with unsubstantiated claims that there is some “undertable” deal done between the two.

According to a Renal Registrar I spoke to, renal transplantation is the only definitive treatment option for patients with end-stage renal failure who are dependent on hemodialysis to replicate the normal kidney function of removing toxic wastes from the body.

A donor kidney can either come from a living donor or kidney that is obtained from a suitable donor who has died suddenly but had otherwise been in a good state of health. Such a transplant is called a cadaveric renal transplant.

Due to the scarcity of cadveric kidneys, there are strict clinical guidelines governing the selection of recipients to ensure they will benefit most from the renal transplants.

Below are some of the guidelines:
1. Below the age of 60.
2. Must not be suffering from any terminal or incurable disease like cancer, AIDS, ischaemic heart disease (triple vessel disease), chronic liver disease, chronic lung disease etc.
3. Free from blood-borne diseases like hepatitis B and C.
4. Social and economic background to ensure that patients who receive the transplant are able to continue follow-up and afford the expensive post-transplant immunosuppressive therapy.

Strictly speaking, Mr Tang did not qualify to be a recipient as he has undergone a bypass surgery for triple vessel disease. (meaning the three coronary arteries supplying oxygen to his heart are blocked which puts him at high risk of death from a heart attack). In fact, the Straits Times reported that he was struck off the waiting list for a cadveric transplant.

Under normal circumstances, when a cadaveric kidney is available, the patient with the best blood and tissue match will get it. However Mr Tang was able to bypass this as Mr Tan has expressed his wish explicitly for his kidney to be donated to Mr Tang before he was hung.

Mr Tan’s elder brother Tan Chor Juay told The Sunday Times that Mr Tan had requested that his kidneys, liver and cornea be donated only a few days prior to his execution. Mr Tang was “called up” by NUH to have the renal transplantation done on the eve of Tan’s execution which seems to imply that a suitable donor has already been found.

A renal transplantation is a major surgery. Both the donor and the recipient have to go through an extensive pre-operative examination to ensure that the donated organ will not be rejected by the recipient’s immune system. This includes frequent blood and radiological investigations.

This means that Tan’s decision to donate his kidney to Mr Tang may not be as haphazard as what the press reported and instead may be a well considered, pre-mediated decision.

If Tan really wish to donate his organs to “help others”, he doesn’t have to specify any specific donor and why to Mr Tang who is no relation or friend of his ?

Did Mr Tang get in touch with Tan before his execution ? What is the real reason behind Tan donating his kidney to Mr Tang ? If Mr Khaw Boon Wan really wish to get into the bottom of things, he can easily find out the truth. However, he declined to do so on the grounds of “patient privacy”.

Under the current laws, it is still illegal for Singaporeans to purchase a kidney from a living donor. I am not sure if this applies to prisoners on the death row. Is it against the law for one to offer financial incentives to an inmate to donate his organ after he is sent to the gallows ?

Mr Khaw Boon Wan has been surprisingly dodgy on the issue. He seemed genuinely happy for both Mr Tang who was able to get a successful transplant and Tan for his ‘commendable’ act of donating his organs to save the lives of others while ignoring the possibility of a legal transgression here.

It does appear that certain rules can be bent and eyes can be closed for those who are wealthy and well connected in Singapore.

SInce Independence Day, independence aplenty...

2009-01-12T16:26:00.002+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/01/since-independence-day-independence.html

posted by LuckySingaporean

It has been several decades since we gained independence from the British. What "independence" meant to our forefathers was taking control of their destiny - to be independent of their British masters who governed them. Since our independence from the British, our govt has taken our independence to a whole new level....

Recent discussion surrounding the independence of our judiciary tells us how accomplished we are as an independent nation. Our judiciary is now independent of decisions from the Privy Council in England and it is independent beyond all doubt...anyone wearing kangaroo T-shirts is jailed for breaking the law for committing judicial blasphemy. Our AG engages in verbal and legal warfare against the Western media which constantly attacks ours judiciary like barbarians in our civilised world. The independence of our judges are so unquestionable that any worries about them being beholdened due to the appointment process can only be dismissed as conspiracy theories.

Now there will be an independent panel to decide on which party political film will be allowed in Singapore. I'm sure they will be as independent as the team that investigated Mas Selamat's escape and their views will be as independent as that of the Straits Times.

Having set high standards for independence in our institutions our govt constantly lament that Singaporeans are too dependent on the govt. You may wonder how this is possible when we are not a welfare state...when there are no safety nets like in Japan, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Korea. We are dependent on the govt for housing, transport, water, electricity and medical care.....and the PAP govt is so tired of the people being so dependent that it has hindered its ability to raise prices. An outstanding govt like the PAP ought to be able to raise prices to whatever it wishes and not have all these dependent people screaming at those price hikes. When our govt laments that Singaporeans are too dependent on the govt, it expresses the desire of our elite leaders to break free from a citzens who they see as hindering them from realising their grand achievements.

Yes, the PAP govt has created an independent judiciary, independent civil service, numerous independent panels,...and now it wants its citizens to be independent enough to be able to accept those price hikes without screaming the 4 letter word - PAIN.

Help us Cope

2009-01-12T16:18:00.001+08:00

http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2009/01/06/the-mrbrown-show-helping-us-cope/

Sound bites:

"I COPE"
"I SNAP"
"I HOP"

Not the time to flaunt your riches

2009-01-12T14:09:00.001+08:00

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/1/10/focus/2975672&sec=focus

Extracted from article:

A high-ranking civil servant’s account about spending RM110,124 for him, his wife and son to learn fine French cooking has blown up in his face.

Two factors invited criticism to flare.

First, he was seen as flaunting wealth, obtained from his high pay, at a time when Singapore is suffering one of its worst slumps in history.

Many thousands of workers are still losing jobs or suffering wage cuts.

And, secondly, government leaders are accused of being hugely overpaid, as a result of which some are no longer able to relate to the common people.

HDB not singing in tune with Govt?

2009-01-12T13:58:00.001+08:00

http://luxuryasiahome.wordpress.com/2009/01/12/hdb-not-singing-in-tune-with-govt/

Source : Today - 12 Jan 2009

Extracted from article:

The Government has recognised their plight and has promised help. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said the Government would help workers acquire new skills and make sure businesses continue to operate by cutting costs and ensuring that they have access to credit.

However, this message doesn’t appear to have trickled down to the Housing and Development Board (HDB), which has raised the rents of its commercial properties while almost everyone else has brought theirs down.

Wasn’t the HDB established to provide cheap lodging and premises to not only the population at large but also to Singapore’s small- and medium-sized enterprises (SME), which employ the bulk of our workers?

Or is its main priority now to churn out huge profits? Perhaps the tagline of it new vision and mission statement, “Soaring to Greater Heights”, should read “Soaring to Greater Profits”.

Keeping seniors at work

2009-01-09T14:04:00.001+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/01/keeping-seniors-at-work/

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spoke at the Reinventing Retirement Asia Conference organised by the Council of The Third Age. He urged “no let up in keeping seniors at work”. He said that outmoded social attitudes and systems have to change, and that seniors should continue to work beyond the customary retirement age.

I agree.

Less energetic

Older people should continue to work, if they are productive and useful. But we have to recognise that they are less energetic, slower and more likely to fall sick. They cannot be expected to work as productively as younger people.

Older people should be allowed to work at a slower pace and part time, and to earn a proportionate wage. If their wages match productivity, it is likely that employers will continue to engage the older workers – as they bring the benefit of experience, lower training cost and greater stability in the workforce.

Fair wages

But, the older workers should not be exploited. They should be entitled to a fair wage for the work that they put in. Left to fend on their own, the seniors will be exploited by the market. If employers can get people to work at lower cost due to their desperate situation, the wages of seniors will stagnate or drop.

The trade union movement can, and should, take a stronger stand to get a fair deal for the older workers. Most of these workers were formerly the members of the trade union. There is little that the movement can do if it continues to believe that wages should be left to market forces.
Individual workers will continue to be weak. That is why they need a trade union to help them get fair wages through collective bargaining. There is a role for the trade union movement to play a more active role.

Saving for retirement

A better protection for the older workers is financial independence. During their working life, they should set aside sufficient savings to meet their financial needs during retirement.
If they have sufficient savings at the customary retirement age, they are financially independent. They do not have to work if they do not get satisfactory working conditions and wages. These people can continue to work for pleasure, to keep active, and to benefit society. A supplementary income is a bonus.

Unfortunately, many of our older workers are not financially independent. They are not able to save sufficiently or to invest their savings wisely during their working life.

The wages of our lower income workers are inadequate and had stagnated during the past decade. This is due to the absence of a minimum wage policy, a pro-business environment and reliance on market forces. It has led to a widening of the income gap. The fruits of economic growth are not fairly shared among the population, leaving people at the lower income groups in a worse position.

The cost of living increased significantly during the past decade. Although the official statistics calculated inflation at a modest level of 2 percent for most years, the actual inflation rate felt by most people were much higher, as they see it daily in the consumer prices, taxes and levies. The inflation rate escalated to 7 percent in 2008.

High cost of living and inadequate wages result in less money available to be set aside as savings for the future. Many people reduce their savings due to this squeeze.

Poor return on savings

The return on savings has been poor. For risk-adverse savers, the interest rate on bank deposits dropped to below 1%, which was grossly inadequate to cover the actual inflation rate.

Those who invested in life insurance and structured financial products received a poor return relative to the risk. The financial institutions were able to take away a large margin on these products to earn a big profit. In good years, these products gave a modest return to the investors. In bad years, the investors suffered the full impact of the losses. The investors have also been exploited by the market.

During the global financial crisis, more than 10,000 risk adverse investors had their hard earned or life savings completely wiped out on their investments in the credit linked notes, which were marketed to them as safe investment products. These investors were not risk takers, as they were not given a high return on these notes. To earn a modest return of 5%, they had to lock up their savings for 5 years.

Disappointed seniors

It is a bad mark on Singapore’s success story that so many seniors do not have sufficient financial security, in spite of a lifetime of hard work and prudent savings.

This is directly attributed to the economic strategy of reliance on the free market and inadequate protection for workers and consumers.

It is quite sad that many seniors have to work to earn a low income just to survive. They have to work hard and long hours, in spite of their weakened health. Apart from the low wages, they have to suffer indignity as well.

The Prime Minister quoted the example of hotels favouring older women attendants to clean rooms. But they tend to drop out due to pressure from their children. “This is a delicate matter of face and status,” the PM said.

There is no need for people to suffer indignity, if they receive fair wages. If the room cleaners are given adequate wages, they will have greater dignity and will even receive the encouragement of their children!

In some countries, refuse collectors earn more than office workers. If this situation applies in Singapore, there will be no shortage of locals wanting to work as refuse collectors.

Positive Government policies

It is time to review this failed strategy – which has resulted in many seniors facing the financial insecurity of retirement.

We need positive Government policies to make a change to improve the lives of the working people. They need to have fair wages and a fair return on their savings.

We need stronger regulations, trade unions and consumer associations to safeguard the interests of workers and consumers in the free market environment.

Tan Kin Lian
http://www.tankinlian.blogspot.com/

S'poreans ranked lowest

2009-01-09T14:00:00.001+08:00

http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_323961.html

Extracted from article:

SINGAPOREANS are at the bottom of a ranking of retirement income from pensions in the Asia-Pacific region, says the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

Singapore's pension is provided by the Central Provident Fund (CPF).

'The relatively low replacement rate for Singapore is because the calculations only consider the earmarked retirement account,' says the study. 'If an individual were to put the general account towards retirement-income provision as well, then the replacement rate would be 82 per cent.'

It points out that it would be foolish to say that one Singaporean who withdrew from the CPF to buy a house is worse off than another who built up a retirement income and then had to use some of it to pay for housing.

'Nonetheless, there is a risk that older people find themselves asset-rich and income-poor in retirement and facing difficulty in unlocking the value of their housing assets to pay for essentials,' the study says.

Temasek’s Merrill losses could exceed $2bn

2009-01-08T09:43:00.001+08:00

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b1845f60-dcf3-11dd-a2a9-000077b07658.html

Extracted from article:

Temasek, the Singapore state investment fund, is sitting on significant paper losses related to its stake in Merrill Lynch, the investment bank acquired by Bank of America last week.
The state agency’s unrealised losses could amount to more than $2bn, excluding any hedges, according to a Financial Times analysis based on publicly available filings.

Temasek declined to comment.

We are emailing this letter to people who earlier signed petition

2009-01-06T03:13:00.005+08:00

Please let us know how we could improve the letter. Thank you.

--------------------

DRAFT

Dear Sir/Madam

We are volunteers helping in the petition is to call for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for election, either as the Elected President or Member of Parliament of Singapore.

More than 1,100 persons have signed the petition so far.

From our records, your email address has been listed as having signed the online petition.

We would like to take this opportunity to update you further on who is Tan Kin Lian as well as to update you on our efforts so far.

Who is Tan Kin Lian?

Mr Tan Kin Lian joined NTUC Income in 1977 and was the CEO from 1994 to 2007. He is recently involved in several public activities, including helping investors to deal with possible mis-selling of financial products (eg Lehman Brothers Minibond).

Mr Tan wrote about his efforts at his blogsite, http://tankinlian.blogspot.com

Around end of 2008, a petition was organised to call for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for election either as the Elected President or Member of Parliament of Singapore.

Mr Tan Kin Lian said if 100,000 signatures could be gathered for the petition, he would respond to the public call. Read a news report here: http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_305814.html

Update From Us

We are a group of Singaporeans who have volunteered to help. We believe that the aims of the petition is to get more Singaporeans aware that they now have a choice for a potential candidate for public office.

The volunteers have set up a website at http://tkl100kpetition.blogspot.com. We hope this website could serve as a place for us to update you on the progress of the petition. Please feel free to drop by the site. We will also update information that we feel might be of interest to you. We would also appreciate very much feedback and comments from you.

What You Could Do Next

We hope you could also help to publicise our website and invite your friends to sign the petition form at our petition website. Through your support, we believe Singaporeans would be empowered on a journey to decide on whether they need a new representative to be the voice for the people.

If you wish to receive further updates from us on our progress, we would appreciate if you could reply "Yes" to this email to indicate so. Otherwise, since we do not have your permission, we will not be sending you any further updates through email.

Thank you very much and happy new year.

Volunteers for Tan Kin Lian Petition

A piece of a disappearing past: Singapore's last rural village

2009-01-05T09:31:00.001+08:00

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/04/asia/village.php

Extracted from article:

"We will need to optimize land use, whether it is though reclamation, building upwards or using subterranean space," Mah Bow Tan, the minister of national development, said recently, in describing the plans for population growth.

"Even if I want to show my children how I was brought up, I can't show them," said Ho Why Hong, 50, a taxi driver, as he searched for Kampong Buangkok. "Everything is torn down."
"When we were growing up we didn't lock our doors," he said. "That kind of trust we had. Everyone knew each other. Any stranger who came into the kampong, we knew."

Correspondence with [TKL friends on Facebook] continues...

2009-01-04T20:01:00.001+08:00

Dear TKL Friends

We understand Mr Tan has written to you, and he is waiting for you to reply.

We have a gathering coming up.

http://tkl100kpetition.blogspot.com/2008/12/new-year-gathering-for-volunteers.html

Would you like to join?

Volunteers

On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 7:29 PM, TKL Friends wrote:
Hello TKL Petition Volunteers:

We are just volunteers like yourselves, helping Mr. Tan Kin Lian to
run for a public office.

Please feel free to link up your site with the Group of "Friends of
Tan Kin Lian":
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42687992231

We have crossed links with many relevant sites.

Unity is strength!

Regards
TKLfriends

[Previous post]

-----------

Dear Sir/Madam:

The volunteers have set up a Group of "Friends of Tan Kin Lian" on the facebook to network with Mr. Tan Kin Lian and his friends and supporters, as well as investors.

Please link your facebook account to the Group of "Friends of Tan Kin Lian", and publicize its URL:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42687992231

Wish you a Happy New Year!

Regards,
TKLfriends
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=42687992231

Will people fall through cracks in insurance coverage after means testing?

2009-01-04T10:02:00.003+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2009/01/happy-new-year-and-1st-pap-gift-arrives.html

Happy New Year and the 1st PAP gift arrives!

Happy New Year.

We all heard the reassuring words of our PM who said yesterday there will be help for those in need in 2009. Coming from someone who said that the GST hike was meant to help the poor we all know what to expect in times of trouble. In fact the 1st gift from the PAP has arrived today. It is a gift for the most needy Singaporeans - those who are sick. Today means testing will be implemented at all govt hospitals.

I have pointed out that it is interesting how the govt can means test you without taking into consideration what your final medical bill is. If you examine the means testing criteria it is based on income OR housing. So if you lost your income due to retrenchments, they can disqualify you from affordable care because of where you stay. Just to get an idea what medical bills are like these days, you just have to look at the case of the pregnant maid who had a pre-matured baby who was treated in one of our govt hospitals - the total bill was $67,000 for a 27 day stay at hospital. Well, you might think that for Singaporeans the medical insurance takes care of that....that is a misconception. Our system does not take care of newborns with congenital health problems or are simply born pre-mature. A baby born 2-3 months pre-mature can result in a bill of $100K-250K and this is not covered by insurance. But this is one of the cracks in our system - insurance with its payment limits, types of treatment etc will mean more people falling through the cracks. Also, many people will be uninsured because they are too old, have pre-existing conditions, have no income etc. Just look at what happened to the US system which was based on insurance.

What has been driving up medical costs? Last year hundreds of thousands of foreigners came to Singapore for medical treatment because Singapore has been marketed as a medical hub to the rich in the Middle East and around the region. That strained our capacity and drove the cost of medical care up. The PAP's solution of this problem is to make Singaporeans pay more when they are sick.

So this is the 1st gift from the PAP govt in 2009 and it is to those who will get sick in 2009. How's that for a great compassionate start to 2009....

We cross 1,000 signatures

2009-01-01T13:11:00.003+08:00

At 1.11pm on 1 January 2009, the number of signatures for the petition reached 1,110.

Breakdown:

Online: 905 signatures

Paper: 205 signatures

Thank you all for the help and support!

Happy New Year!

2009-01-01T00:01:00.000+08:00

And Happy CNY (in advance)

Courtesy of a reader

2008-12-31T17:28:00.005+08:00

Just received this from a friend and fan of this blog.

In his own words, the state flag depicts Mr Tan's selflessness and commitment to the nation and its peoples. He chose the word "HOPE" to reflect not just the hope that Mr Tan would offer himself as the next Presidential elect (Singaporeans want a say in who they want, and they deserve a choice of candidates with good standing and competence) but also the hope Mr Tan brings to the office of the President of the Republic of Singapore.

Thank you, my friend.

The New Paper requests for interview. What should we do?

2008-12-31T00:39:00.002+08:00

We are trying to figure out what to do...

-------------

Dear Lediati

Thank you for your mail. We'll have to think about this first. Most of us are publicity shy.

Please give us some time to get back to you.

Regarding your question on "why the volunteers are volunteering to organise the petition," you might want to look at
http://tkl100kpetition.blogspot.com/2008/12/who-are-we.html

Perhaps the question to ask is, why not participate in the petition?

Wishing you all the best in 2009.

Volunteers

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Lediati Tan wrote:
Hi

I'm Lediati, a reporter from The New Paper.

I found your email address on the website which is helping to organise the petition for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for election for public office in Singapore.

I am interested in doing a short interview with the volunteers. Would any of the volunteers be interested in being interviewed on the issue of the petition for Mr Tan Kin Lian to stand for election for public office? The interview would be on why the volunteers are volunteering to organise the petition.

Please let me know if any of the volunteers is agreeable to an interview.

Regards
Lediati Tan
Journalist, The New Paper
Singapore Press Holdings

New online petition form

2008-12-30T15:05:00.000+08:00

We are now developing a new form to collect petition online.
Feel free to go there and play around with the form, but please do not leave any signature there as we will clear the data later.
If you have any feedback, we'd appreciate that too.

Volunteers

New Year gathering for volunteers

2008-12-30T09:43:00.007+08:00

Some of us are joining a new year gathering next week.

The details are:

Mon: 5 Jan 2009
Time: 7 to 11 pm
Place: [****]'s Music Studio, Blk 261 #02-24, [****]

We are going to sing, drink, chit chat, relax, and perhaps ponder over other issues of the day.

If you like to join, please contact us.

Volunteers

You can now subscribe to this blog using your email

2008-12-30T09:29:00.003+08:00

If you like to subscribe to this blog, you can do so by keying in your email at the box at the bottom of the right panel of this blog.

The email update is sent to you once a day whenever there is new content.

Volunteers

Tan Kin Lian’s final rally for investors at Speaker’s Corner: The authorities have done little to help investors

2008-12-29T06:36:00.003+08:00

http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=1677

http://wayangparty.com/2008/12/28/tan-kin-lian’s-final-rally-for-investors-at-speaker’s-corner-the-authorities-have-done-little-to-help-investors/

Written by Ng E-Jay
27 December 2008

At the final rally for investors at Speaker’s Corner, Mr Tan Kin Lian lambasted MAS for doing scant little to assist investors, many of whom have lost their life savings. Financial institutions have also given very little compensation to investors, and frequently have dragged the cases and not even bothered to give investors a satisfactory reply.

Addressing a rally of around 150-200 people, Mr Tan Kin Lian gave a brief overview of the actions he has taken thus far. He has submitted a total of 4 petitions over the past three months, of which 3 were presented to MAS. The petitions were aimed at:

asking the Government to look into any possible wrong doings by the financial institutions, in particular, whether the Financial Advisers Act and the Security and Futures Act had been breached,

asking the MAS to investigate the sales training given by the financial institutions to their representatives, and

asking the MAS to review the complaint handling process of the financial institutions, to set up an independent unit to receive and process the complaints, and to encourage the financial institutions to adopt a collective approach in offering fair compensation to the investors.

However, MAS has insisted that it cannot respond to Mr Tan or any individual investor directly, and would only communicate its intentions via official press releases. To date, Mr Tan has not received any communication on whether the specific requests contained in the petitions has been considered or implemented.

Mr Tan Kin Lian also went through the results of the survey which he conducted. The results are posted here.

Out of 16 investors who replied to the survey, the financial institution had rejected 9 cases. Compensation was offered for 1 case, where the amount invested was $20,000 and the investor was younger than 62 years. The rest of the cases are still pending.

Of those decisions already made, the decision were provided after an average of 6 ½ weeks. This is significantly longer than the 4 week period stipulated by MAS.

Out of the 16 cases, 2 have been lodged with Fidrec. One case could not go to Fidrec as the amount of compensation asked for was over $50,000.

Overall, investors expressed discouragement and disappointment at the complaints process.

According to Mr Tan Kin Lian, he estimates that around 95% of the complaints which were received by the financial institutions and which have been given a response have been rejected outright. There are still many cases outstanding which have yet to be given a response, despite MAS’ stipulation that financial institutions should respond to complaints within 4 weeks of receiving them.

Of the few cases that have been submitted to Fidrec, even fewer have received any response whatsoever. It is clear the authorities are pussyfooting and dragging their feet on the matter.
Over the past three months, not much action has been taken by the authorities to address investors rights and concerns, and there is a growing impatience on the ground. The case for a class action lawsuit is getting clearer by the day, despite Mr Tan’s repeated insistence that it should only be used as a last resort.

Singapore lawyers do NOT dare to represent investors

Mr Tan Kin Lian recounted with very grave disappointment that he experienced tremendous difficulty procuring legal assistance for investors. (This is in stark contrast to Ms Sylvia Lim’s assertion at the IBA Conference in 2007 that WP has no problem finding lawyers — perhaps Ms Lim should step forward to help rope in lawyers for Mr Tan Kin Lian.)

Many senior lawyers whom Mr Tan spoke to were too afraid to step forward to provide legal aid or to represent investors because of their ties with the financial institutions. They were fearful of offending the banks, thinking that if they helped investors, the banks might cut them off.

Other lawyers whom Mr Tan has known personally for 10-20 years have also responded negatively to him, citing issues with compensation. These lawyers would not spend the time to read the prospectus and research into the case without first receiving payment, which can be very expensive.

My response is: Has civic-mindedness and social responsibility gone completely out of the window? Are Singapore lawyers so afraid for their livelihood that they do not dare to assist fellow citizens in times of need, or are they so materialistic and caught up in the rat race that they refuse to even spend a little time researching the cases to see if they can be fought in Court?

The attitudes of Singapore lawyers are truly disappointing. With our legal profession having castrated itself, no wonder the authorities dare to wayang and deny Singaporeans their basic rights.

The Minibond group in particular had spoken to 6 or 7 lawyers concerning their case, but none of them were willing to take it up.

Finally however, there was one lawyer who expressed willingness to step forward to represent the Minibond investors. He is Mr Leonard Loo. So far, Mr Loo has managed to contact around 200 investors for possible legal representation. The maximum amount that each investor would have to pay in the event a class action lawsuit is initiated is $4,800.

There are some Minibond investors who are concerned Mr Loo may be too young and inexperienced to take on such a complex case, but Mr Loo assured investors that he is receiving assistance from some senior lawyers on the matter.

So far, Mr Loo is the only lawyer in the whole of Singapore who has not only expressed willingness to represent investors in a class action lawsuit, but has already begun the process of researching into the cases and proactively reaching out to investors.

Mr Leonard Loo will give a briefing to Minibond investors next Tuesday. The details are:
Date: Tuesday 30th December 2008
Time: 7 to 9 .30 pm (registration starts at 6 pm )
Venue: Singapore Polytechnic Graduates Guild House
1010 Dover Road Singapore 139658
Admission: Free (Register online here)
Photo of Mr Leonard Loo at Speaker’s Corner, 27 Dec 2008:

Another lawyer has also come forward to offer some assistance, but he does not know the products very well and is too busy to study them in detail. This lawyer has approached a Queen’s Counsel to seek his opinion on whether a class action lawsuit is feasible. Mr Tan Kin Lian will ask someone to pay the initial consultation fee for the Queen’s Counsel, which will come up to around $10-$20K.

In Mr Tan’s opinion, the entire legal process, if it really does go through, can take a very long time. The bank will also likely lodge an appeal in the event of any ruling in favour of investors. Hence, Mr Tan is of the opinion that investors should carefully consider any settlement offered by the banks.

The banks are unlikely to offer full compensation as they only receive 3-5% commission for selling the product. However, 50% compensation would be deemed fair.

Furthermore, in Mr Tan’s opinion, the banks are only likely to offer compensation to investors who participated in the class action lawsuit.

To wrap up, Mr Tan Kin Lian said that in the past three months of campaigning, the results have been discouraging, but he has done his best. He encouraged investors to join their respective investor groups.

After Mr Tan spoke, Mr Leonard Loo spoke briefly to the crowd, urging them to seek legal help if they have not been fairly compensated. When seeking legal help, investors should get ready the following documents which they exchanged with the financial institutions:
application form for the original product
risk profile analysis
prospectus of the product

Mr Loo also reiterated Mr Tan Kin Lian’s advice that investors should seriously consider any out-of-court settlement offered by the banks.

After the rally, Mr Tan Kin Lian gave out a momento to those present, which was a calendar card with a picture of one of the rallies printed in front with the words “Standing Together”.

Speaker's Corner, 27 Dec 2008 - Speech

2008-12-28T07:08:00.001+08:00

1. Meetings at Hong Lim Park
The first meeting for investors of the credit linked notes was held on 11 October 2008. This was followed by another 9 meetings. The first 8 meetings were held at weekly intervals while the last two meeting was held at fortnightly intervals. Today’s meeting is the 10th and final meeting to be held at Hong Lim Park for the credit linked notes.

You may wonder why Hong Lim Park was chosen to be the venue for the meeting. The most important reason is that it is free and is available at any time. However, it is not quite convenient, due to the lack of facilities. There is no sound system and everyone had to stand. On a few occasions, we had to share the use of the park with other activities. It rained on one meeting.

Still, it is a wonderful experience for us to meet at Hong Lim Park and to get to know each other.

2. Petitions
During the past three months, a total of four petitions sent organised, of which three petitions were presented to the Monetary Authority of Singapore.

The first petition dated 10 October and signed by 983 people, asked the Government to look into any possible wrong doings by the financial institutions that created and marketed the credit linked notes.

The second petition dated 17 October and signed by 277 people, asked the MAS to investigate the sales training given by the financial institutions to their representatives who sold the credit linked notes.

The fourth petition dated 31 October and signed by 1,073 people, asked the MAS to review the complaint handling process of the financial institutions, to set up an independent unit to receive the complaints and to encourage the financial institutions to adopt a collective approach in offering fair compensation to the investors.

These petitions were presented to the chairman and executive director of MAS and were acknowledged. My requests to meet with the chairman or senior management of MAS were declined. I received replies that any development would be communicated to the public through media releases.

Up to now, we have not received any communication on whether the specific requests contained in the petitions had been considered or implemented.

3. Complaint Handling Process
We have received reports that about 5,000 complaints had been received by the financial institutions that sold the credit linked notes. The MAS had issued a statement that the complaint handling processes of these institutions had generally met their expected standard.

We have not been provided with information on the number of people that have received full or partial compensation for the alleged mis-selling of the product. A small number of the so-called vulnerable investors had been compensated. Although the actual number is not disclosed, this is estimated to account for less than 2 percent of the investors.

The perception of the investors is quite different from the MAS. Many investors found the complaint handling process to be carried out in an unfair and unsatisfactory manner.

The anecdotal reports from any investors are that their complaints of alleged mis-selling were rejected by the financial institutions.

MAS had required the financial institutions to give their decision on each complaint within four weeks. This deadline appeared to have been not met. There are many reports from investors that they had not received any decision after six weeks or longer.

The next step for the investors is to lodge a complaint with the dispute resolution center, called FIDREC. From our survey, a small number of investors had taken this second step to lodge their complaints. Most of the investors intend to take this second step, but the process has been extremely slow and difficult.

4. Collective legal action
Many investors had indicated that they will join in a collective legal action against the financial institutions. It will be correct for me to say, on their behalf, they had taken this decision with great reluctance and difficulty. They would have preferred a more amicable way to get fair compensation for their financial loss.

I like to ask the investors to join the different groups representing the different types of credit linked notes, namely the Minibonds, High Notes, Jubilee Notes and the Pinnacle Notes.

The leaders of these groups will be holding separate meetings next year for the investors. As each group is smaller, it is easier to arrange a more conducive place to hold an indoor meeting.

Each investor group is also setting up a website and an e-mail list to communicate with their members. The key activities of these groups are to educate their members, provide assistance and advice, and to organise the collective legal action.

I shall be in touch with the leaders of these groups and to co-ordinate the activities of the various groups, if required.

5. My blog
I will continue to keep all investors updated through my blog, www.tankinlian.blogspot.com.

I wish to thank a few volunteers who had been providing me with daily updates of news and articles from other sources. I have put the relevant articles in my blog. I encourage the investors to the postings in my blog to keep in touch with the developments.

6. Conclusion
I am sorry that there was little progress in getting fair compensation for your financial losses, in spite of the great efforts that were put in by many people. We have tried many different approaches, but keep hitting a stone wall – even tough we keep our eyes “wide open”.

During the past three months, we have made many friends from among the investors and volunteers. Let us continue our friendship and continue our efforts to seek fair compensation for the investors, although the future efforts will be done outside of Hong Lim Park.

Let me wish all of you, all the best for 2009.

Tan Kin Lian

Tan Kin Lian's future plans on the 100,000 signatures

2008-12-27T07:27:00.008+08:00

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Kin Lian Tan <kinlian@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 4:36 AM
Subject: Meeting at 4 pm at [****]

Please ask all the volunteers to attend the meeting today, if they are available. After the meeting, they can help at Hong Lim.

--
Tan Kin Lian
http://www.tankinlian.blogspot.com/

Lost the sense of bonding and togetherness

2008-12-27T07:03:00.001+08:00

http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/10/lost-sense-of-bonding-and-togetherness.html

Dear Mr. Tan Kin Lian

I am a retiree in my sixties and, like you, my heart sentiments and empathies are for the man-in-the- street, ordinary Singapore citizens, and the senior citizens, who are not able to express themselves on their plights and miseries, for lack of ability, education, literacy, IT skills and media know how.

The plight of the poor misguided uncles and aunties, and including my wife and I, who laboured all their lives trusting in the government's promise of a better life, when they can retire with their CPF nest eggs, have just had their dreams shattered and crumbled by the latest chain of events from the financial collapse from around the world. Some of us may be in the same age bracket as a few of our longstanding national leaders, some of whom have passed on, and some who are still giving counsel on the affairs of state. How does one compare the earning of a poor cleaner or bus or taxi driver, with that of those whose monthly salary income is 2000 times as much, or whose lifetime savings is not even one fifth of one months salary of some.

It is not my mission and agenda to protest against the establishment, just for protest sake. But we are now talking about retirees and hardworking citizens who have saved diligently and conscientiously for nearly all their working lives, and as they now walk into their sunset years, they have just suddenly seen the sun go down, without being sure whether it will rise up again the next day.

This is a very sad and human tragedy for Singaporean leaders to address quickly. There is no point in building more of the asset rich Singapore hardware, when the national heartware is in tatters. We have to offer a temple of hope, in order to create a real sense of community belonging in this small so called ' Red Dot island paradise'

Whilst we are shut out our city to entertain and accomodate our foreign guests, as they pop champagne and feast on caviar and veal, whilst they watch some silly machine zooming by, our taxi drivers, retailers and restaurants are hurting from lack of patronage and support. Whilst Rome burns, we are makiing sport.

It is paradox, and an irony, when well qualified and able young Singapore born sons and daughters, leave this 'island paradise' for greener pastures in Australia, NZ, the U.S., Canada, and may not come back home, and we then encourage new alien migrants from neighbouring feeder countries, offering them PR or Singapore citizenship after two years, because they can play better ping pong, or badminton, or football to add to our talent pool.

On the one hand we have full born and bred political opposition members who risk and sacrifice all they have and owned to speak up for the silent Singaporeans, but they are crucified on our court altar, for their their defiance and different points of view. Are we supposed to behave like obedient Singaporean sheep that goes "baa baa, yes sir, yes sir, you're right again,
all the time" .

What has happened to the days of the "gotong royong" when we were more kin and kind as near equals with 'cangkuls and poon kees' in hand, to re-build track roads and clean up the beaches. That was a time when we truly felt the kampong community spirit of collective self help, and we could relate and identify very strongly with our MPs and national leaders fighting for this country's survival. What has happened to the recognition and memories of some of our surviving pioneer old guards like Toh Chin Chye, Goh Keng Swee, Othman Wok, Ong Pang Boon, Jek Yeun Thong? Are they forgotten, because they have now become irelevant today? What about those who have also contibuted but are no longer with us - Devan Nair, S Rajaratnam., E.W Barker, Howe Yoon Chong, George Bogaars, Hon Sui Sen, Lee Siew Choh, Lim Chin Siong, J.B. Jeyaretnam and others.

This country and this nation's progress in the last 40+ years has been one of miraculous transformation, if we judge our report card by stainless steel, gleaming glass, bricks and mortar, and manicured trees and the landscaped gardens. No Singaporean in their 50 -80 years, would deny our government this credit. Our port, airport, CBD, MRT, highways, public housing, schools and institutions of learning stand out as wonderful trophies to our national sense of accomplishment, and much pride for the civil servants, town planners and estate managers. I, myself, have been a beneficiary of this economic progress, when I recall, as a kid, how I used to take my bath from a public stand pipe, or well, and poo into a bucket. Yes, I am grateful to this goverment for improving our creature comfort, dignity and quality of living, but not of life.

But somewhere along the way, coming to where we are today, we seem to have lost that sense of bonding and togetherness with our founding fathers. Our progress reminds me of the book "Animal Farm" by George Orwell. With the success of the physical transformation of the environment, there has also been an attitudinal and spiritual transformation of another kind. It has been a gradual process and shift of our cultural values and national priorities

As our leaders work and live in fine comfort, we the citizens of Singapore are mortgaged to our hilt, and now even our hard earned savings are going up in smoke, because the people in charge knows how to set up the traffic rules, but did not do anything to monitor and track the traffic flow.

Hence for many of us who continue to place our blind faith and trust in a government backed and publicly endorsed brand name, and then to be told when the bottom falls out, "you make your own bed, you lie in it". " If you fall down from bed, through no fault of your own, that's too bad. That's life. The market forces of caveat emptor will have to prevail "

It is like saying, we have proudly built for you a wonderful zebra crossing, but you can cross at your own risk, without the need for traffic light controls..

You are a brave man for doing what you are doing now, and I will refrain from egging you on, by being just an entertained spectator. Some people will do that, but when the riot vans come around, many will scatter and hide. I am a peace loving person, but like many Singaporeans who have helped to build and make this place our home, I too have my gripes and grouches, at the way we are often being programmed and manipulated by those who know what is best for us.

It will be interesting to see if the Prime Minister will still deliver on his national rally pledge, that no one will be left out of the national banquet and pie sharing, even in this difficult and trying time. To the rich dining in aircon comfort, an unfinished bowl of rice is only just $0.50 cents. To the impoverised and starving, that same bowl of rice, could represent a days wage, of burning and straining in the hot sun, or some bent old lady collecting tin cans and discarded cartons just to stay alive, let alone calling it a living.

May God bless, and keep you.

PatAngel

Fwd: Withdrawal as a Volunteer

2008-12-27T06:58:00.002+08:00

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: TKL Petition Volunteers
Date: Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: Withdrawal as a Volunteer
To: [****]

Dear [****]

Don't worry about this.

Family comes first for most of us.

Let's do not do anything that will jeopardise that foundation.

All the best.

Volunteers for Tan Kin Lian Petition

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: [****]
Date: Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 5:24 AM
Subject: Withdrawal as a Volunteer

Dear All,

I wish to withdraw from the volunteer group due to personal reasons. Basically, my [****] has recently express his disapproval of me continuing with the cause.

Thank you for your understanding and am sorry to disappoint.

[****]

Could you join us to help on 27 December at Speaker's corner?

2008-12-26T08:32:00.002+08:00

Mr Tan Kin Lian is holding the last meeting of the credit note investors at Speaker's Corner on 27 Dec.

We need help for the logistics at this meeting, e.g. to distribute a memento (sudoku book or calendar card) to the investors, or to distribute the handout from previous week's meetings.

It is also an opportunity for us to publicise the blog for 100,000 signatures, and to collect signatures.

Please join us if you could.

Thank you.

Volunteers for Tan Kin Lian petition

Helping Singaporeans cope with recession

2008-12-26T06:13:00.005+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2008/12/helping-singaporeans-cope-with-inflation/

Helping Singaporeans cope with recession

Friday, 26 December 2008, 12:11 am | 150 views
Tan Kin Lian / Columnist

Introduction

Singapore’s economy is in recession. It will get worse and may take one or two years to recover.

Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has advised people to continue spending, to keep the economy growing and avoid the downturn getting worse. (See here) Many people do not agree with this call. They are afraid of losing their jobs. They prefer to save more, in case the need they money in the future. The reduced domestic spending is now being felt in many sectors of the economy.

I wish to suggest two measures to overcome the fear and stabilise the economy – relief loan and cut in GST.

I suggest that the Government introduce a new scheme, to provide a relief loan to Singaporeans who are retrenched or face a reduction in earnings due to a shorter work week.

The relief loan is to be provided by a Government agency and is subject to certain conditions. Interest rate shall be charged at 2.5% per annum. The amount of the loan shall be for the loss or reduction in earnings, and shall be available for a period of up to 24 months.

Certain measures can be implemented to prevent abuse, and ensure that the relief loan is used for the right purpose. The loan has to be repaid at a future date, when the borrower is able to find a better paying job, e.g. when the economy recovers. If not paid, it can be deducted against the CPF savings payable at age 55.

The existence of this relief loan will give comfort to the working people that they can continue nearly as usual, and do not need to cut down their spending drastically at this time. It will support the suggestion made by Senior Minister to keep the economy going.

Those employed will have the comfort that if they should be retrenched at a later date, they have access to a relief loan that carries a modest rate of interest. They do not have to borrow from credit cards at 24% interest or from loan sharks at higher interest rate.

The relief loan should also be available to workers who agree to work on a shorter work week (e.g. 3 or 4 days a week) for a proportionate reduction in wages. They can get a relief loan for the difference. This will encourage businesses (facing a drop in demand) to keep their workers on a shorter work week, instead of retrenching the excess workers.

The relief loan is similar to unemployment benefit that is available in many advanced countries. In this case, it is a loan that is required to be repaid in the future.

The Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, has introduced a simple and effective scheme to cope with the budget deficit of the state. He asked all state employees to take 2 days of unpaid leave each month. This should reduce the expenses by about 10%. This is better than to retrench 10% of the state employees to achieve the same results.

It is not just cutting wages by 10%. The employees get two additional days of free time to spend on other activities. For employees who have been working long hours, this will be a welcome break.

I hope that the employers in Singapore can adopt the same approach. Perhaps the Government can take a lead.

Reduce GST to 3%

There is a need to increase domestic spending and personal consumption, to offset the drop in external demand.

A temporary reduction in GST to 3% will help to stimulate spending. Many people will consider spending now, and enjoy a 4% reduction in prices, due to a reduced GST. Other people will still be cautious and save the money, but a big reduction (of 4% in GST) may spur others to spend now.

If money is given to people to spend, it is likely that many people will use the money to pay off their debts or save for the future. The actual impact on domestic spending is reduced. This was the case of the stimulus package in the USA a few months ago.

A reduction in GST is likely to produce a positive impact on the economy. With people continuing to spend, more people will keep their jobs and the economy will carry on nearly as much as before. There will still be a contraction in demand, but the impact will be minimised.

I agree with the call by SM Goh Chok Tong for people to continue to spend normally, so that the economy will not suffer such a severe decline. I believe that a reduction in GST is likely to encourage people to achieve this desired outcome.

Conclusion

This economic downturn is global in nature. It is the most severe in 70 years. Singapore is likely to face a larger impact from this downturn, due to the structure of our economy. We need to have “out of the box” measures to overcome the challenges.

I hope that my suggestions can be considered.

Madoff scandal

2008-12-25T10:05:00.001+08:00

http://forum.channelnewsasia.com/viewtopic.php?p=2453905#2453905

What is striking about the Madoff scandal and the credit linked notes debacle is that investors in Madoff’s schemes were not blamed for their losses. All attempts are made to help soothe and mollify the victims of Bernard Madoff. No one says to those who were conned by Madoff that they should have read the fine print or that they should have known better. There is the imputation of naiveté as Madoff’s supposedly consistent returns cannot possibly have been managed in a period of massive volatility, but fools the investors in Madoff’s funds maybe, criminals they are not.

The drum beat of articles in the Straits Times subtly instructing investors that they should blame themselves for their losses never seem to end. They have even gotten journalists whose parent was personally affected to turn their backs on kin and write the nonsensical propaganda intended to further mislead you. Madoff is now under 24 hour house arrest and everyone associated with him is under suspicion, has anyone in Singapore been punished? Actually, punishment has been doled out and it has landed squarely on the heads on the investors who have dared to seek justice. Character assassination is their favorite ploy and in their hour of deepest pain, Singaporean journalists have not hesitated to plunge the knife in even further. Why is it that these minions can go through life without any sense of decency or shame? They would prostitute the people close to them to get that small pet on the head?

I continue to urge investors to organize without the distraction of those who have different agendas. A weak leader who cares will serve you better than to listen to those who monopolize the soap box for their own personal ambitions. Otherwise you might want to lie down flat on your back and take the blame that the government wants to shove into you. You have to be strong for you must understand that they will move hard against you.

Merry Chrismas to all in Singapore

2008-12-25T00:01:00.002+08:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEcyAW3oQck&feature=related

Dear Santa, I'd Like Leadership

2008-12-24T06:45:00.001+08:00

http://www.cnbc.com/id/28361692

Extracted:

"So in MY wish list to Santa Claus I would put this right on top, in big fat red letters:

Please give us political leaders who actually LEAD and who can inspire optimism!

and for good measure, I would add this to my list:

- give us bankers that remember what BANKING was all about

- corporate leaders who concentrate less on polishing the next shareholders letter and more on their product

- leaders who see the jobs they create as "capital", not as disposable waste to be used as the easiest way to cut costs when the going gets tough

- shareholders that concentrate more on long-term investment than the next quarterly payout"

ArtBoon

Let's send letter to friends: Petition for Tan Kin Lian [A new website]

2008-12-23T19:02:00.003+08:00

Dear Friends,

Mr Tan Kin Lian has publicly requested for 100,000 signatures from Singaporeans for a petition to show their support for him to stand for public office, as an MP or President and help voice out for the people of Singapore.

We believe your support for him can help to bring about change for a better Singapore.

We have set up a blog site as part of the effort of a group of volunteers to publicise the petition.

The website is at http://tkl100kpetition.blogspot.com.

Please feel free to leave your comments there, or highlight issues that might interest you.

Through your support, we believe you can empower Singaporeans on a journey to decide on whether they need a new representative to be the voice for the people.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Volunteers for Tan Kin Lian

Not such protest

2008-12-23T15:11:00.006+08:00

Came across the following pictures on the recent riot in Greece where a student was shot dead by police.

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/12/comments_2008_greek_riots.html#comments

This is the 3rd most popular site talked about at Digg in the last 7 days (as at 23 December 2008).

The many comments there are interesting to read.

But I don't want to see such riot here.

ArtBoon

Sudden jump in Medisave Required Amount, Food Inflation?

2008-12-23T13:28:00.002+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2008/12/recession-but-mra-and-food-inflation-up/

Recession, but MRA and food inflation up?

Tuesday, 23 December 2008, 11:34 am | 149 views
Leong Sze Hian / Columnist
Sudden jump in Medisave Required Amount (MRA)
I refer to the article, “$18,000 required in Medisave from Jan 1” (TODAY, Dec 10).
CPF members who turn 55 and are able to meet the Minimum Sum (MS) requirement – which is $106,000 currently – will still need to set aside a sum in their Medisave Accounts when making a withdrawal. From Jan 1, the sum to be set aside will be raised from the current $14,000 to $18,000.

Introduced in 2004, the Medisave Required Amount (MRA) was scheduled to increase by $2,500 each year until it reaches $25,000 on Jan 1, 2013.

The increase of $4,000 is 60 per cent higher than the original scheduled increase of $2,500.

Why the sudden huge jump in the MRA? What criteria was used to determine the MRA?

As such quantum changes affect the amount of CPF that we can withdraw at age 55, I would like to suggest that it be subject to parliamentary debate and approval.

At its current rate of increase at $4,000 a year, does it mean that the MRA will be $34,000 by 2013, instead of the originally announced $25,000?

Since from Jan 1, 2013, the MS of $134,000 (after inflation adjustment as projected by the Longevity Insurance Committee’s Report) and the MRA must be retained at age 55, does it mean that those with less than $168,000 ($134,000 MS + $34,000 MRA) will only be able to withdraw $5,000 at 55?

With the recession, retrenchments, wage cuts, and high inflation, this unexpected huge increase in the MRA may affect those who turn 55 next year and in the future, as they may have less to withdraw from their CPF to help them tide over these difficult times.

According to the Longevity Insurance Committee’s report, 60 per cent are projected to have at least $67,000 in their CPF at age 55 in 2013.

So how many Singaporeans have less than the total required sum of $168,000 at age 55 in 2013?

Food inflation despite the recession
I refer to media reports that food prices are still continuing to rise despite the recession, and media reports about Malaysia’s Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister’s success in visiting and getting hawker stalls and hypermarkets to reduce prices to help Malaysians with high inflation and the current recession. For example, about 4,500 Indian and Indian Muslim restaurants in Malaysia this week dropped their prices, as well as several hypermarket chains.

I also refer to media reports that HDB will not be deferring any of its upgrading projects. However, may not one of the causes of inflation be the upgrading of hawker centres?

After upgrading, the total rental, service and conservancy fees (S & CC), refuse fees, etc. typically increase by more than double for the existing stallholders. For those new stalls that are put up for tender, the rental can be 10 or 20 times more.

Is it any wonder, then, why food prices have gone up so much?

I think we may need to weigh the benefits of the policy of upgrading all hawker centres by 2010, in light of high inflation, recession and retrenchment, against affordability, given that the annualised median wage change was only about 3.2 per cent per annum from 1999 to 2008.

In this connection, food inflation and the overall Consumer Price Index (CPI) was 11.5 and 8.9 per cent respectively, over the last 17 months till October.

We may need to balance much higher rentals and prices against the need for “re-painting, [re-designing] for better ventilation, improved seating capacity and toilets”.

Since $4.7 billion of public construction projects have been deferred to ease inflationary pressures, why not defer the hawker centre upgrading too?

After all, isn’t rapidly-rising food inflation something which affects almost everyone, and thus, is more important and urgent to deal with?

For example, in the Bugis Albert Centre market upgrading, as less than half the original 380 stalls – 170 of them – have moved into the temporary centre, how many of the other 210 stalls have given up their livelihood, because the increased rental and other costs that may have made their businesses no longer viable?

How many would give up because they would not be able to afford the $5,000 to $9,800 (monthly $312.50 to $612.50 over 16 months) for the temporary centre?

Some of the hawkers who moved to the temporary centre have reported a drop in daily takings by more than 40 per cent.

Some hawkers in upgraded hawker centres have also reported a drop in business relative to higher costs.

There is the argument that the hawkers would be better off after upgrading, for if the hawker centres are not upgraded, they would become more run-down and customers would patronise other food places. This may be true, but on the other hand, people may avoid them because of the higher prices or cook at home instead.

Will there still be affordable food (relative to the recent past), when all the remaining 54 food centres are upgraded by 2010?

Seasons Greeting from Tan Kin Lian

2008-12-23T12:16:00.001+08:00

http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/12/seasons-greetings-and-best-wishes-for.html

Plebiscitary Caesarism

2008-12-22T23:03:00.017+08:00

"Democracy has been defined in various ways by politicians, philosophers, and political scientists. But whatever definition is used, there is no doubt that to qualify as a democracy a regime must meet a number of minimum requirements, and must at least consist of a system in which the selection of the leadership and the formulation of general rules valid erga omnes are ultimately the result of popular decisions, that is based on public consensus of citizens. A democracy requires that such a consensus must be formed freely, without any manipulation by anyone holding that particular type of power which derives from the control of the mass media; it further requires that political power requires be exercised in the general interest, and not in the private interests of those in government. The conflict of interest, therefore, is not a problem peculiar to the present Italian transition, but one of the unavoidable issues of democratic theory to which all democratic systems have explicitly or implicitly brought a response."

Extract from :
The Politics and Legislation of Conflict of Interest in Italy - Stefano Passigli
users.ox.ac.uk/~hine/seminarpapers/Passigli%20paper%201.doc

I read the above paper today and would like to share it with all our visitors. Somehow I feel that what the writer describes about the political situation in Italy is also similar to what we have here, except that in our case it is much more serious. Hopefully, more Singaporeans will be awakened.

Sleepy Throat

Singapore has lowest GDP but highest paid PM in the world!

2008-12-22T22:51:00.002+08:00

http://singaporeindianvoice.blogspot.com/2008/12/singapore-has-lowest-gdp-but-highest.html

Highest Paid Presidents / PM's around the World
Source: The Mango Blog

The Economic recession has hit one and all, salary cuts and pink slips have taken their toll on the common man. Presidents, Prime Ministers are no exception. Most of the heads have cut down on their salaries or are planning to do so in the near future. Lets take a look at what the heads of top nations are earning.

Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore
(Country GDP: $235.6 billion - 2008)
Politicians in Singapore are amongst the most highly paid government officials in the world. Lee Hsien Loong, Prime Minister of Singapore earns five times more than the American President. Lee Hsien Loong takes an annual salary of $2.46 million.

Barack Obama, USA
(Country GDP: $13.81 trillion - 2007)
Second on the list is the President of the biggest economy of the world with a GDP of $13.81 trillion (2007). President Elect, Barack Obama will be getting an annual salary of $400,000 when he joins office next year.

Kevin Rudd, Australia
(Country GDP: $773 billion - 2007)
Third on the list is the Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd with an annual salary of $330,300.

Angela Merkel, Germany
(Country GDP: $2.585 trillion - 2006)
The first lady chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel receives an annual salary of € 242,000 (€ 22000 bonus included) ~ $ 307,340.

Nicolas Sarkozy, France
(Country GDP: $1.871 trillion - 2006)
The French President, Nicolas Sarkozy gets an annual salary of € 240,000 ~ $ 304,800. This is after he doubled his salary earlier this year.

Stephen Harper, Canada
(Country GDP: $1.274 trillion - 2007)
Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of the seventh largest economy of the world, Canada recieves an annual salary of $280,000.

Gordon Brown, UK
(Country GDP: $2.772 trillion - 2007)
Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of the second biggest economy in Europe and fifth largest in the world receives an annual salary of € 187611 ~ $238,266.

Vladimir Putin, Russia

(Country GDP: $2.076 trillion -2007)

The Russian Prime Minister recieve an annual salary of $81,190, which is significantly less than his counterparts.

Tan Kin Lian '11

2008-12-22T21:53:00.005+08:00

A gift from one of you. Thanks. You know who you are :)

Transport fares not linked to oil prices? Really?

2008-12-22T10:52:00.001+08:00

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2008/12/transport-fares-not-linked-to-oil-prices-really/

Transport fares not linked to oil prices? Really?
Monday, 22 December 2008, 9:22 am | 171 views
Andrew Loh
At a grassroots event on 20 December, Transport Minister Raymond Lim was reported to have said that “transport fares are not directly linked to oil prices”:
21 December 2008 (Straits Times)
The answer is that public transport fares are not directly linked to oil prices… Refuting the idea that fares are directly linked to oil prices, he pointed out that ‘from 2007 to this year… oil prices went up 40 per cent, but fares went up just 0.7 per cent’.
However, in the last two years transport operators have cited increases in oil prices as a reason for asking for fares to be increased. One report (see below) even reported operators as citing higher oil prices as the “main justification for a fare rise”.
23 March 2007 (Straits Times)
In the past two years, the operators cited higher oil prices as the main justification for a fare rise.
2 August 2007 (Straits Times, AsiaOne)
Back then, the operators blamed high costs - in particular the high price of fuel and manpower - for the need to raise their fares.
Today, the companies are citing the same reasons - manpower and energy - for their fare increases.
1 August 2008 (Straits Times):
In a statement on Friday, SBS Transit said it is applying to raise bus and train fares because fuel and energy costs have “increased significantly in the last year”.
So what is going on? Were Singaporeans misled? Why is the Transport Minister now saying that fares are not linked to fuel prices?

No $ for Sg SMEs, But Plenty for Jap Com

2008-12-22T07:30:00.005+08:00

http://forums.delphiforums.com/3in1kopitiam/messages/?msg=4129.1

Published December 22, 2008

S'pore widens lead as Asian investor in Japan
US$2.5b invested in first 9 months accounts for 86% of total from Asia

By CHUANG PECK MING

Email this article
Print article
Feedback
(SINGAPORE) Singapore has extended its lead as Asia's biggest investor in Japan, pumping US$2.5 billion in direct investments into the country in the first nine months of this year.

The sum is 86 per cent of the total that Asia invested in Japan during the same period - and double the amount Singapore companies injected into the country for the whole of 2007, according to the Japan External Trade Organisation.

Globally, the United States remained the largest direct investor in Japan so far, based on the net balance of payment figures provided by Japan's Finance Ministry.

But hit by an economic slowdown at home, US companies have cut back their investments from US$13.27 billion in 2007 to US$5.61 billion in the first nine months.

This is likely to depress overall foreign direct investment (FDI) in Japan for 2008. From January to September, US$17.95 billion flowed into Japan. For the whole of last year, the figure was US$22.18 billion.

'The value of inflow from Singapore rose by more than 10 times over the past five years and accounted for 80% of the net inflow from Asia in 2007.'

- Jetro

Except for the US, which accounts for a big chunk of the FDI in Japan, Western Europe, Latin America and Asia have raised their stakes in the first nine months of this year.

Within Asia, South Korea (US$246 million) was the next biggest investor in Japan after Singapore. While China has been making waves with huge investments in the mining sector in Latin America, Africa and Australia, its FDI in Japan in the first nine months was only US$30 million - though that's double its FDI in the country for the whole of 2007.

In a report that does not take into account the January-September 2008 figures, Jetro notes that the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation invested heavily in Japan's real estate last year - US$862.2 million in Hawks Town and US$721.8 million in Westin Tokyo hotel.

'The value of inflow from Singapore rose by more than 10 times over the past five years and accounted for 80 per cent of the net inflow from Asia in 2007, of which approximately 60 per cent was investment towards the real estate industry,' the report says.

Singapore posted a net FDI of US$1.28 billion in Japan last year, when FDI in the country hit a new high of US$22.2 billion.

South Korea's FDI of US$221 million was double the amount for 2006, 'boosted by merger and acquisition cases, such as the acquisition of Myodo Metal by Samsung C&T Corporation (US$37 million) and the acquisition of GameOn by NewWiz Games Corporation and other companies (US$95.5 million)'.

As at end-2007, Singapore sunk US$4.62 billion in Japan - the largest among Asian countries. Hong Kong has the next largest Asian FDI in the country, with US$2.3 billion, followed by Taiwan (US$1.53 billion). China's accumulated FDI in Japan was US$125 million as at the end of last year.

Globally, the US (US$44.79 billion) is the biggest investor in Japan, followed by the Netherlands (US$26.03 billion).

U.S. Schools Can Learn From Singapore, Finland

2008-12-21T08:20:00.002+08:00

http://www.newsweek.com/id/175894

Picked up from http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages/?msg=16970.1

Reform School

An Obama education advisor thinks U.S. schools could take a lesson from Finland and Singapore.
Sarah Garland
Newsweek Web Exclusive

Add up the scores on the recent international tests in math and science released last week by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement and it's clear the United States isn't making the grade. Even with an upward tick in math scores, American students were still left in the dust of high-achieving Asian countries, while stagnant science scores were even more disappointing. President-elect Barack Obama has promised to return the United States to the top of the class, and earlier this week he selected Chicago schools chief Arne Duncan to lead the effort as his education secretary. But the controversial Stanford professor Linda Darling-Hammond has been the brains behind Obama's education policy over the past year as a lead education advisor on the campaign and during the transition. Her calls for better tests under No Child Left Behind and better teacher training have made it to the top of Obama's education priorities. Darling-Hammond spoke with NEWSWEEK's Sarah Garland about what America's schools could learn from Finland and Singapore. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK : In the past you've used examples from other countries to suggest ways of reforming No Child Left Behind in the United States. Which countries would you rank the highest in terms of education?
Darling Hammond: Finland ranks the highest generally across the board. The Netherlands, Hong Kong, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and Switzerland are all highly ranked across content areas. In some measures the United Kingdom is catching up a little. Sweden is another one, and a lot of the highly ranked countries are in Asia and Oceana—New Zealand and Australia.

What's the key to their success? What are they doing that the United States is not?
First, they have many fewer children in poverty and a much bigger safety net. We have 22 percent of our kids in poverty—the highest proportion of any industrialized country. Our schools have to make up for all of that, including the large achievement gap that kids have when they come to school from low-income families and haven't had preschool education.

Second, they spend their money equally on schools, sometimes with additional money to the schools serving high-need students. We take kids who have the least access to educational opportunities at home and we typically give them the least access to educational opportunities at school as well. We have the most unequal spread of achievement of any industrialized country except for Germany.

Then in Finland or Sweden or Hong Kong or Singapore, teachers get a completely free preparation, with a salary or a stipend while they're training. In Singapore, beginning teachers make more than beginning doctors. Our teachers teach 1,100 hours a year on average. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development average is 650 hours.

How do the examples of these countries support your view of testing?
I have been a longtime advocate for standards. In other countries, that's what you see: you see assessments that are high quality, at least in the high-achieving countries. I sometimes get characterized as anti-testing, which is inaccurate. I am in favor of high-quality assessments and using them for improving teaching and learning, high-quality curriculum and teacher development. I think that in other countries that's what they do.

What is the role of teachers' unions in successful countries?
Other countries put a lot of energy into recruiting the best and the brightest into teaching, training them very intensely, making sure they have professional training. They undoubtedly have ways to get rid of incompetent teachers, but they put a lot of effort on how to be sure that the teachers are competent in the first place. In this country, I've been advocating for a long time, how do we get teachers that are highly competent in the first place. If we're thinking about what we need to do to be competitive with other nations, we need to be thinking about building a supply of great teachers and continually improving their skills, rather than only focusing on the bad teachers when we haven't helped them learn how to be good.

So which countries are going to be the models for the Obama administration?
Certainly we have a different context both politically and in how our education system is organized, but I will say that if you look at some of the highest-achieving states in the United States, we do have this wide variability. Although we rank low on the international assessments, our most high-achieving states and our most high-achieving students are getting an education that has features you would see in other countries. States like Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey—those are states that have attacked standards-based reform, with a focus on developing more thoughtful assessments, tying those to teacher development. They put in place very strong literacy-development programs in the elementary schools, and literacy coaches. You see the same kind of standards-based literacy work in countries that have had strong improvements in their performance. We can learn some things from other countries, but we can also learn some things from within our country by looking at places that are succeeding.

Obama's proposals require money—the funding for prekindergarten, the army of new teachers. How will that happen during the credit crisis?
You have to think about education as an investment. This is me speaking, not the administration speaking, but we're talking about a $700 billion recovery package. The total education investment represented in President-elect Obama's education plan was $29 billion, and that's tiny. For every dollar you spend to make sure that kids get high-quality preschool, you're going to gain anywhere from $3 to $10 back to the economy in reduced failure in school, reduced special-education costs, reduced dropout rates and higher wages and taxes. These kinds of investments actually reap us benefits in the long run.

The results for the latest science and math tests just came out, are you surprised at the U.S. performance?
They were up in math, but not in science. We're not even teaching science in a lot of elementary schools, much less the kind of science that other countries are teaching. When I went to Singapore, at every grade level in every classroom in every school I visited, kids were coming up to show the experiments they'd designed and conducted. High-achieving countries are making sure their kids can be the inventors and engineers of the future. We have to really redouble our efforts.

Will we have moved up within four years?
I would expect so. It takes time to build and rebuild a system, and the financial crisis is really going to be a problem, but I think we will certainly see a turning of the corner if the kind of investments that have been proposed are indeed made. And in eight years, you will see a substantial difference in where the United States is positioned.

Affordable housing

2008-12-21T07:12:00.001+08:00

http://forum.channelnewsasia.com/viewtopic.php?t=198317&&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=451

My england not so power but i will try to share my point of view. What I hope for is affordable housing for all singaporean families that can be paid within 10 years. We don't need the asset appreciation bubble in public housing. Just sell us an ok affordable roof over our heads. If singaporeans can afford and want properties that can appreciate like an investment, they can go buy private housing and compete in the open market of landed properties with foreigners. For the ambitious but once poor singaporean who has made it, they could either sell the flat back to HDB or to fellow singaporeans, then go buy their dream condo in the heart of city. For the rest, who find easy contentment with just a roof and a job, we can spend time with our family and do the things we want. Maybe do amateur research and invent something in our free time, persue our interest be it sports or academic fancies.

With lower public housing cost, and shorter repayment period, we can save enough for our retirement instead of relying on asset appreciation created from influx of FT/FWs and passing the bubble to the next generation who will find it farther and farther from their reach. We don't need to be doing downgrading to release the housing equity for our retirement, its stupid.

shorter repayment => adequate retirement fund => no need to sell to downgrade for retirement => reasonable priced public housing for coming generations (no bubble) => sustainable living for all and future

I read somewhere about maslow's law of evolution(?). I think housing security is an integral part of a society's evolution. We have evolved from single-cell organism to an amphibian but I have a nagging feeling that we are somehow stuck at the amphibian stage. And if we don't find a sustainable model for our housing soon, our society could very well be rolling backwards.... nevermind our hopes of progressing to the primate stage.

Beyond Hong Lim?

2008-12-20T05:52:00.003+08:00

forum.channelnewsasia.com/viewtopic.php?t=187581&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=160

Investors should decide if the weekly gatherings at Hong Lim are useful. If not, you may be better served by moving the discussion to a less public arena where everyone can be heard. There is a need to keep up the pressure without exhausting yourself because the fight will be long drawn. It stopped being a sprint when compensation decisions were made and it has instead become a long and somewhat arduous walk where every effort will be made to discourage you.

The Yahoo! Group is still open but it is inactive due to the lack of critical mass. Following your notification on this board, I checked the dbshighnotes account and have replied to your email.

Although the issue of investor compensation and Tan Kin Lian’s bid for the presidency appear to be unrelated, those of you who have experienced the sort of gross injustice that Singapore’s present system actively creates should understand that some degree of political maturity is vital if anyone of us is to be safe in our country. We are at present like a three year old kid walking around in a man’s shoes too drunk on our own success to understand the grave responsibilities that we must all bear. None of our elected representatives have stood on the side of investors. Only unelected, and in my case, self appointed citizens have dared or bothered to speak up on behalf of the unfortunate. Even members of parliament who are supposedly in opposition have sided with the authorities in their terrible handling of this matter. I do not know who Tan Kin Lian is but I believe his bid to be president of our republic is an event of great importance to the development of our country.

The highest priority now ought to be getting the 100,000 signatures. If you are a credit linked notes investor, the one way I can think of to concretely express your displeasure at how shabbily you have been treated is to get Tan Kin Lian on the ballot. Petitions are just words that can be tossed out with the flick of the wrist. Votes are real and cannot be disregarded.

Here is how I see it. The candidate should never go out to solicit signatures himself. The first order of business is to build a team and appoint a campaign manager. The idea is to not overexpose the candidate and by using volunteers it creates a sense of positive momentum that we believe in making Singapore a better place for one and all. A group of 20-30 volunteers working in pairs on the weekends should get the ball rolling. Neatly dressed, no body odor or bad breathe, they should approach people discretely at transit points like MRT stations or bus terminals. The schedule should be flexible so that volunteers will only have to give whatever time they can but it must be well organized so that gaps in coverage are plugged quickly. If the right catchment zones are canvassed, particularly if areas where there have not been elections for many years are attended to, the 100,000 signatures are achievable. Even if all the requirements are met under the constitution, it does not mean that Tan Kin Lian will allowed to contest. But the fact that the names were gathered would be a powerful and tangible show of support as the name Tan Kin Lian as a spokesman for the investor is now deeply enmeshed.

Despite the appearance of wealth, there is much to be disappointed about how our country is governed. In a different world and at a different time, I wrote that it is not about democracy, but about good governance. Some people were very pleased with my arguments but I will tell them now that it is still about good governance. You may not believe or even care if Singapore survives you, but I do, because I must.