SDP only interested to make life better for Singaporeans

Singapore Democrats

Some have wondered if the SDP’s citing of Mr Fandi Ahmad’s and Mr Terry Pathmanathan’s cases was because they were well-known Singaporeans.

This is not so. The Singapore Democrats have, in the past, also highlighted cases of Singaporeans who were not prominent at all.

Take the case of 88-year-old Mr Abdul Dawart. The elderly man suffered an infection to his prostrate causing him to urinate controllably. This caused his house and surroundings to reek of urine. The New Paper reported the matter on 4 June 2012 (Woodlands flat ‘smells worse than a public toilet’).

The newspaper also reported that a friend of Mr Dawart’s said that the octogenarian did not seek a doctor because “medical treatment is also expensive and Mr Dawart is poor.”

We wrote about Mr Dawart’s case on this website here where we highlighted how the PAP’s healthcare policies had fallen short of taking care of poor Singaporeans like Mr Dawart.

In the article, we also described how the SDP’s alternative healthcare plan could help not just Mr Dawart, but all Singaporeans who face high healthcare costs.

We have also highlighted the cases of other ordinary Singaporeans. For example, we had written about an elderly couple who had to walk all the way home because they could not afford taking public transport after they used all their money to pay for the bill at a polyclinic.

We also cited the case of Mr Ivan Lim who could not afford the prescribed medication for his diabetes and resorted to cutting back on his medication by stretching his one-month prescription into three months. He ended up having his leg amputated.

The SDP’s interest in all these cases, including Mr Fandi’s and Mr Pathmanathan’s, is only to highlight the inadequacies of the current PAP policies and how Singaporeans are unduly penalised by them.

At the same time, we want Singaporeans to be aware that there are alternative policies that can help remedy these problems and make life a little easier for our people.

(In fact, the SDP website was not the first one to highlight Mr Fandi’s case. The Temasek Review Emeritus had posted an article on the matter in 2012. See here.)