SDP’s Chinese New Year Message 2010
Raising the foreign worker levy is a blunt move

This article was originally written for The Online Citizen
How will raising the foreign worker levy improve the lot of locals who are faced with stagnant wages and rising costs?
By Ng E-Jay
The Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) has suggested raising the foreign worker levy to discourage businesses from importing too many low-skilled foreign workers and motivate them to invest more in productivity.
Speaking to the Straits Times a day after the ESC had released its recommendations for overhauling the Singapore economy, Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong said that companies that cannot raise productivity might have to go out of business or leave Singapore, and that the rate of import of foreign workers has to be moderated in light of “social constraints”. [1]
However, it is not clear how raising the foreign worker levy, which is a blunt instrument that merely increases business costs for companies hiring foreign workers, would help very much in achieving the intended objective of raising productivity or of raising the overall standard of living of our workforce.
Imagining Singapore without PAP: Why Not?

Written by Ng E-Jay
04 Feb 2010
Mr Ling Tuck Mun’s ST forum letter “Imagining a Singapore without the PAP” (03 Feb) is a classic example of using vague, unrealistic, hypothetical scenarios to plant in readers’ minds the notion that it is unimaginable for Singapore to function without the PAP.
His exercise of building sandcastles in the air starts with asking the reader to imagine that the PAP distributed all the reserves to Singaporeans, making them millionaires overnight, and then stepped down from power to make way for a new party to take over the governing of Singapore.
Mr Ling then stated that he doubts if any Singaporean would still feel confident of the worth of having a million dollars without the PAP at the helm controlling the CPF, import of foreign workers, our defence, housing, and so on.
First of the bat, who is Mr Ling trying to fool with his atrocious mathematics? Distributing our reserves of $400 billion to a population of 4 million Singaporeans (excluding PRs) would only yield $100,000 per person, hardly making everyone a “millionaire”.
What political candidates should have (not necessarily paper qualifications!)

EDITOR’S NOTE: This post originally appeared on Chia Ti Lik’s personal blog.
A mutual activist friend of ours had earlier shared with both of us some very pertinent points about the supposed relationship between having good paper qualifications and being a good political candidate.
Ti Lik’s post is reproduced in full here as it cuts straight to the chase.
Also appended below this post is a Straits Times Forum letter I wrote concerning the same topic which was published on Saturday in the print edition.
By Chia Ti Lik
02 Feb 2010
A very learned friend was a participant in an IRC discussion.
The IRC discussion was about the local political scene purportedly mandating paper qualifications for credible candidature. I was told that a lot of good arguments were thrown up and they are in short summarized hereinbelow.
I have reproduced these with the kind permission of the author, which until he tells me that he does not mind being named, i shall not name him :)
What is a General Election about?

By Dr Wong Wee Nam
01 Feb 2010
Mr Mah Bow Tan, the Minster for National Development, certainly confuses me. All along I thought a general election is the time when the country and its people take stock of the past and signal what they want of the future. It is also the time when the voters of a constituency assess the candidates offered to them and give their verdict. If there is an incumbent, it is also a report card on their past performance.
It is, therefore, very strange that Mr Mah should come out and declare that a general election is “not about me, an individual minister or an individual MP. It’s really about the residents themselves …”
Where in the world has an election been about the residents and not the candidates?
Mah Bow Tan misses the point, gets caught red-handed by NSP

Written by Ng E-Jay
01 February 2010
After National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan came to know of opposition parties wishing to contest Tampines GRC with the aim of raising the issue of escalating HDB flat prices, he tried to pour cold water on the opposition, saying they should focus on how they can best serve the people rather than making him the focus of their campaign.
In his own words as quoted by the Sunday Times: “A General Election is not about me, an individual minister or an individual MP. It’s really about the residents themselves … … I offer myself up for election because I believe that I can do the best and the most for them. But ultimately it’s for the residents, the people to decide.”
According to the same article, while the minister acknowledged some people may be adversely affected by the housing policies, he pointed out: “There’s no question that our policies are designed for the good of the people.” (ST, “Mah blasts opposition’s GE strategy” 31 Jan 2010.)
Firstly, how can Mr Mah claim that the Government’s housing policies are designed for the good of the people when he has admitted that some have been adversely affected by them? What kind of logic and accountability is he displaying?
Secondly, Mr Mah Bow Tan appears to have missed the point altogether. The opposition has never made him personally the focus of its campaign, but the Government’s housing policies which he directly oversees, which have driven Singapore citizens almost to the point of despair and desperation.
Affordable flats still available? Are you sure?

Written by Ng E-Jay
31 January 2010
A Sunday Times article “Affordable flats still available” (31 Jan 2010) stated that there are still “gems” to be discovered in some housing estates, with 4-roomers in the suburbs like Jurong or Woodlands going as low as $300,000.
$300,000? Is that considered affordable?
According to the latest Monthly Digest of Statistics (Dec 2009) published by Statistics Singapore, the average monthly nominal earnings for CPF members was $3,500 in Q3 2009.
Assuming a combined monthly gross household income of $7,000, it would take a married couple at least 20 years to pay off their mortgage for a $300,000 flat, and they would have paid around $85,000 in interest over the duration of their housing loan, assuming a very conservative 2.5 percent interest rate.
Minister Mentor calls Singaporeans DAFT for faulting Government’s housing policies

Written by Ng E-Jay
28 January 2010
I have never in my life seen a politician call voters STUPID for not accepting his party’s policies, and then ask them not to cast protest votes against his party, all in the same breath.
Yet this was precisely what Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew did at a conference on Wednesday commemorating the Housing Board’s (HDB) 50th anniversary.
According to a Straits Times report “Don’t cast protest vote” (28 Jan 2010), MM Lee said Singaporeans ought to understand that the Government sells them HDB flats at a subsidised price, below market rate, so that they can own an asset that will appreciate in value over the years.
He also said voters must be “daft” if they found fault with the Government’s housing policies, and cautioned Singaporeans not to cast a protest vote against the ruling party over this.
A U-turn in PAP’s economic and population policies? We shall see.

Written by Ng E-Jay
26 January 2010
Has there been a dramatic U-turn in the PAP’s economic and population policies? Despite recent statements by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong on the need to raise productivity and temper the rate of import of foreigners, I remain unconvinced till I see actual results.
On Monday, Mr Lee told the audience at the Singapore Perspectives 2010 Forum organized by the Institute of Policy Studies that Singapore has to adopt a revised economic strategy focused more on improving productivity than pursuing growth at all costs.
This blog, Sgpolitics.net, has repeatedly used the phrase “growth at all cost” numerous times over the past year to describe the flawed economic and population policies of the PAP that will end in disaster should they be allowed to go on unchecked.
Mr Lee said that land constraints prohibit indefinite expansion of the workforce by importing more and more foreigners, and in his own words as quoted by the Straits Times: “We have to extract maximum value from the resources that we have; every piece of land must be put to optimum use, activities which are no longer competitive or productive have to be gradually phased out.”
PM Lee: Complete loss of perspective at Singapore Perspectives Forum

Written by Ng E-Jay
26 January 2010
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong spoke at length at the Singapore Perspectives Forum on Monday from issues ranging from the elections to immigration, but if media reports are anything to go by, he and the PAP have completely lost their perspective on national issues.
Referring to recent mainstream media reports on ex-government scholars joining opposition parties, Mr Lee said that election candidates should not be judged by their academic abilities but by what they can do for Singapore. (CNA, “Candidates should be judged on what they can do for S’pore: PM Lee“, 25 Jan 2010.)
In Mr Lee’s own words as quoted by CNA: “I can tell you, we interview many scholars and each time we field a few of them. And we interview other people too and we often field people who are not scholars. It is good to see it in perspective.”
Reading between the lines, is PM Lee implying that scholars who join opposition parties are PAP-rejects?
First and foremost, academically well-qualified people including scholarship recipients joining the ranks of the opposition is nothing new, particularly in recent years. It is only due to the fact that the mainstream media has consistently blacked out news of academically qualified Singaporeans joining opposition parties that the public has come away with the impression that this is a brand new phenomenon.
Inadequate Public Transportation
The public transport companies have been increasing their fees steadily over the years, in response to the rising price of oil and the overall rising cost of labour. Or at least, that is what they claim. However, service standards such as train frequencies have in fact dropped, as Mr Goh Meng Seng, a member of the National Solidarity Party, explains in the following article.
By Goh Meng Seng
23 Jan 2010
The following is a Table compiled to show the contrast of population growth vs MRT development.

(Data compiled from Table 3.1 of the Yearbook of Statistics 2009 and SMRT Annual Report 2007/2008)
From the table above, we can gather the following facts (from 2003 to 2008 as the population figures for 2009 is not available yet):
Total Population Growth 17.6%
Resident Population Growth 8.2%
SMRT Total Number of Passenger Trips (Million) Growth 19.0%
SMRT Car Kilometres Operated (Million) Growth -13.0%
SMRT Average Operating Car Occupancy Rate Growth 35%
What do the above statistics tell us?
It is quite puzzling to me actually. The public transport companies like SMRT has been increasing their fares for the past 7 years but it seems that their service standards have dropped with respect to the population growth.
Human rights are universal, say Ambalam and Chee

By the Singapore Democrats
25 Jan 2010
Mr Gandhi Ambalam and Dr Chee Soon Juan walked out of prison on Saturday after serving a one-week jail term for distributing flyers that were critical of the PAP Government.
They were greeted by friends and supporters outside Changi Prison. Undaunted, the two said that they would continue to campaign for democracy and free speech in Singapore, and immediately sat down with members and supporters at a nearby coffeeshop to discuss initiatives to further the programme of the Singapore Democrats.
The PAP has long been known for its use of the law to stifle democracy and human rights in this country. But this has not stopped it from shamelessly anouncing to the world that Singapore is a democratic country.
Mr Ambalam and Dr Chee were convicted, together with Ms Chee Siok Chin, by District Judge Chng Lye Beng for assembly without a permit in 2006 when a group of them distributed flyers outside the Raffles City Shopping Centre.
Jaslyn Go: Thoughts on the TBT Trial

The End Is Near – TBT Trial
By Jaslyn Go
22 Jan 2010
As we approach the last tranche of our TBT trial, there are alot of emotions build up for myself and my fellow co-defendants.
It was not easy to come this far, let alone still carrying on in this long and draining trial.
Tranche after tranche our numbers are dwindling due to way our cases are being dealt with. For eg, Francis was forced to plead guilty as he will be away on 19th Jan 10 and judge insisted the hearing to start on 18 Jan 10. Sylvester having to plead guilty due to work commitment.
As for myself, my boy, Joe-En has started his Primary One this year, a phase that is important to him as well as for me as a mother. I have made application to Judge Chia Wee Kiat with the understanding and support from my 10 remaining co-defendants to have the lunch break from 1130 to 1330 so that I could rush home to bring my boy to school. Thankfully the judge allowed my application without objection from the DPP.
Discriminatory job ads on the decline? That is but the tip of our problems.

Written by Ng E-Jay
22 January 2010
According to a report recently released by the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (Tafep), discriminatory job advertisements such as those unfairly specifying the preferred race or gender of the job applicant without explaining why those characteristics are necessary for the job, are on the decline.
The Straits Times article “Discriminatory job ads decline: Report” (21 Jan 2010) quoted the Tafep’s report as saying that the number of print advertisements containing discrimination fell to 1% last year compared to 19.7% in 2006.
Immediate questions arise. Firstly, what criteria does Tafep use to determine whether companies have fairly specified certain age or gender requirements as a result of genuine manpower needs (like requiring applicants to be below a certain age as hard labour is involved)? Secondly, why has Tafep confined itself to print media when there is a slowly growing number of job advertisements made online?
These questions however are academic. The main issue I have with the Tafep report is that it has neglected to consider discrimination against Singaporeans vis-a-vis foreign workers.
AlJazeera’s video report on Singapore’s liberal immigration policy
AlJazeera interviews former NMP Siew Kum Hong, Jolovan Wham from Humanitarian Organization for Migrant Economics (H.O.M.E.), and Dr Dawn Dekle from the Singapore Institute for International Affairs on Singapore’s liberal immigration policy.
Notable views:
The Government (has) put in place a set of very liberal policies, and did not anticipate the predictable outcome of private employers exploiting the system that was put in place …. …. We have a growing number of foreigners with no special skills who are competing with middle class and lower middle class Singaporeans for jobs, and that is where Singaporeans are feeling it the most. (Siew Kum Hong)
The Government has not thought very much about the social support structures that have to come in tandem with import of foreign workers but has just liberalized the recruitment of these workers (resulting in abuse). (Jolovan Wham)
Electoral Fairness, Not Patronage!
Written by Ng E-Jay
14 January 2010
(I originally wrote this article for The Online Citizen.)
In his article entitled “A masterstroke?” (Jan 9), TODAY correspondent Loh Chee Kong argued that the recent proposal of allowing more NCMP seats might fragment the opposition and diminish the lure of trying to capture a GRC.
Loh argued that the extra NCMP seats would test the opposition’s unity and cohesiveness as candidates from rival parties would now have an incentive to compete against each other to be one of the nine “best losers” rather than focusing the fight against the PAP.
CPF Board refuses to answer the question of minimum payouts for CPF Life

Short Notes from the Editor
18 January 2010
A Straits Times reader, Mr Manuel Nathan, recently wrote in to ask what are the lowest possible payouts for the CPF Life plans.
He was concerned that the Guide to CPF Life published by the CPF Board had stated in fine print that the payout range based on CPF interest rates of between 3.75per cent and 4.25per cent does not represent the lower and upper limits of the payout.
In its response, Mr Lo Tak Wah, Director (Retirement and Investment) of the CPF Board avoided answering the question altogether, preferring instead to stick to the propaganda that CPF Life is designed to have less volatile payouts and that inflation-indexed payouts are not feasible. (See: CPF Life designed to have less volatile payouts.)
The real reason why the CPF Board avoided answering Mr Nathan’s question is because the lowest possible payout is zero dollars.
My views on the SDP’s stand on civil disobedience and political reform

SEE ALSO:
1. Civil Disobedience in Singapore: Part I, by Dr Chee Soon Juan.
2. Civil Disobedience in Singapore: Part II, by Dr Chee Soon Juan
Written by Ng E-Jay
14 January 2010
I have been debating with a commenter who uses the nickname of “BryanT” in the SDP website. As this commenter is very persistent in putting up arguments in favour of the ruling party’s ideology and is also fond of trying to discredit SDP, I have found the need to provide comprehensive rebuttals to some of his claims.
This is a summary of some of the comments I have put up over the past few days explaining why I support SDP’s methods and ideas.
In one comment, BryanT agreed with Dr Chee Soon Juan’s statement that changes are often initiated by a few. Dr Chee was referring to the changes the SDP has been trying to bring about to our flawed political system that denies Singaporeans their fundamental liberties. Civil disobedience is one of the various methods promoted and employed by Dr Chee.
BryanT however disparages Dr Chee’s efforts and downplays his potential for success by arguing that the few who eventually succeed are those who are invariably supported by the masses right from the beginning. In his exact words, the few (that is, the ones trying to initiate change) must be in tune with what the masses desire and what the masses see as reasonable means to attain these. Otherwise, the actions of the “informed” few will not only fizzle out eventually, but be shunted repeatedly.
SDP’s Let’s Talk with Dr Wong Wee Nam
“You cannot have an inclusive society if you only include people who think like you … … In short, to have an inclusive society, you must have more democracy.” — Dr Wong Wee Nam
A Wake Up Call for Singaporeans

SEE ALSO: “I will not live by fear”: Activist, businesswoman, mother.
Written by Jaslyn Go
06 Jan 2010
Among us F4, I was the least interested in politics..not forgetting, the one with the worse political knowledge.
Kelvin’s political knowledge was the best, which even Ti Lik as a politician takes his hats off to.
E-Jay’s political knowledge came pretty close to Ti Lik’s, and he being a very keen and fast learner, he absorb very fast.
I am the most hopeless among the 4 of us..my mind always drift off when they start to discuss politics or the recent policies, too ‘cheem’ for me as what I always tell them..
Ti Lik and E-Jay were the one who always drag me to attend SGHR and SDP meeting back then..Even though I told them I am not keen, but they always managed to persuade me to join them eventually..























